130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16492179)
1. Commentary on "scientific peer review to inform regulatory decision making: leadership responsibilities and cautions".
Yosie TF
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):41-3. PubMed ID: 16492179
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Scientific peer review to inform regulatory decision making: leadership responsibilities and cautions.
Patton DE; Olin SS
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):5-16. PubMed ID: 16492173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Commentary on scientific peer review to inform regulatory decision making: roles and perspectives of scientists.
Omenn GS
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):37-9. PubMed ID: 16492178
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. A perspective on scientific peer review for informing regulatory decisions: making sure peer review makes a difference.
Greenbaum D
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):17-9. PubMed ID: 16492174
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Legislating peer review in the Endangered Species Act.
Male T
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):33-5. PubMed ID: 16492177
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Scientific peer-review processes in setting environmental quality standards in Japan.
Ikeda S; Uchiyama I
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):21-3. PubMed ID: 16492175
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Scholarly publishing. U.S. eases the squeeze on 'sanctioned' authors.
Bhattacharjee Y
Science; 2004 Apr; 304(5668):187. PubMed ID: 15073341
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Scientific peer review to inform regulatory decision making: a European perspective.
Lofstedt R; Fairman R
Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 16492176
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. A welcome retreat at Treasury.
Kennedy D
Science; 2004 Apr; 304(5668):171. PubMed ID: 15073338
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Unmatured science and government regulation.
Burger EJ
J Toxicol Environ Health; 1976 Nov; 2(2):389-99. PubMed ID: 1011295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Regulatory policy. White House softens disputed peer-review plan.
Kaiser J
Science; 2004 Apr; 304(5670):496-7. PubMed ID: 15105462
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Peer review in the balance.
Curfman GD; Morrissey S; Annas GJ; Drazen JM
N Engl J Med; 2008 May; 358(21):2276-7. PubMed ID: 18499571
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Crunch time for peer review in lawsuit.
Wadman M
Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):6-7. PubMed ID: 18322484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Peer review. Pfizer denied access to journals' files.
Kaiser J
Science; 2008 Mar; 319(5870):1601. PubMed ID: 18356495
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Bioterrorism. Panel provides peer review of intelligence research.
Bhattacharjee Y
Science; 2007 Dec; 318(5856):1538. PubMed ID: 18063763
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.
Gupta P; Kaur G; Sharma B; Shah D; Choudhury P
Indian Pediatr; 2006 Jun; 43(6):479-89. PubMed ID: 16820657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [American judge preserves confidentiality in the peer review process].
Overbeke AJ
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2008 Jul; 152(28):1555-6. PubMed ID: 18712221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A relapse of joining.
William Lineaweaver C
Microsurgery; 2005; 25(4):245-6. PubMed ID: 15981235
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Courts deny Pfizer access.
Gura T
Nat Biotechnol; 2008 May; 26(5):480. PubMed ID: 18464759
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Who owns the data?
Blei AT
Hepatology; 2004 Dec; 40(6):1237. PubMed ID: 15558736
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
