BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1331947)

  • 1. Salem comes to the National Institutes of Health: notes from inside the crucible of scientific integrity.
    Needleman HL
    Pediatrics; 1992 Dec; 90(6):977-81. PubMed ID: 1331947
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 'Misconduct' dispute raises fears of litigation.
    Dalton R
    Nature; 1997 Jan; 385(6612):105. PubMed ID: 8990102
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. What to do about scientific misconduct.
    Nature; 1994 May; 369(6478):261-2. PubMed ID: 8183349
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. NIH office plans research on misconduct.
    Dalton R
    Nature; 1999 Jul; 400(6740):99. PubMed ID: 10408427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Definitions and boundaries of research misconduct: perspectives from a federal government viewpoint.
    Price AR
    J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):286-97. PubMed ID: 11653365
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. "Thank God for the lawyers": some thoughts on the (mis)regulation of scientific misconduct.
    Reynolds GH
    Tenn Law Rev; 1999; 66(3):801-18. PubMed ID: 12625356
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Giving scientists their due. The Imanishi-Kari decision.
    Dresser R
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1997; 27(3):26-8. PubMed ID: 9219021
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Scientific misconduct. Back to the drawing board.
    Anderson C
    Nature; 1991 Mar; 350(6314):100. PubMed ID: 1848681
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The federal research misconduct regulations as viewed from the research universities.
    Wright DE
    Centen Rev; 1994; 38(2):249-72. PubMed ID: 11656759
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Policing fraud and deceit: the legal aspects of misconduct in scientific inquiry.
    Protti M
    J Infor Ethics; 1996; 5(1):59-71. PubMed ID: 11653390
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluating the oversight of scientific misconduct.
    Redman BK; Merz JF
    Account Res; 2005; 12(3):157-62. PubMed ID: 16634167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Federal actions against plagiarism in research.
    Price AR
    J Infor Ethics; 1996; 5(1):34-51. PubMed ID: 11653389
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Scientific misconduct. Ill-defined, redefined.
    Palca J
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(5):4. PubMed ID: 8891701
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. NIH misconduct procedures derailed.
    Hamilton DP
    Science; 1991 Jan; 251(4990):152-3. PubMed ID: 1846242
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Study proposed on integrity of published data.
    Gavaghan H
    Nature; 1994 Oct; 371(6500):733. PubMed ID: 7935825
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. ORI finds Imanishi-Kari guilty of misconduct, proposes 10-year ban.
    Gavaghan H
    Nature; 1994 Dec; 372(6505):391. PubMed ID: 7984221
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Federal panel endorses Baylor fraud claim.
    Dalton R
    Nature; 1999 Feb; 397(6720):549. PubMed ID: 10050835
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Recent government decision refocuses attention on several cases of alleged scientific misconduct.
    Marwick C
    JAMA; 1993 Sep; 270(11):1286. PubMed ID: 8395607
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Neuroscientist accused of misconduct turns on his accusers.
    Dalton R
    Nature; 1998 Apr; 392(6675):424. PubMed ID: 9548238
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Imanishi-Kari still in limbo.
    Nature; 1994 Mar; 368(6466):1-2. PubMed ID: 8107875
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.