These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17124762)

  • 1. Two facets of peer review and the proper role of study sections.
    Lenard J
    Account Res; 2006; 13(3):277-83. PubMed ID: 17124762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Grants, politics, and the NIH.
    Drazen JM; Ingelfinger JR
    N Engl J Med; 2003 Dec; 349(23):2259-61. PubMed ID: 14657434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Peer review reviewed.
    Nature; 2007 Sep; 449(7159):115. PubMed ID: 17851475
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. NIH needs a makeover.
    Dey SK
    Science; 2009 Aug; 325(5943):944. PubMed ID: 19696331
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. National Institutes of Health. Changes in peer review target young scientists, heavyweights.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2008 Jun; 320(5882):1404. PubMed ID: 18556519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. National Institutes of Health. Two strikes and you're out, grant applicants learn.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2008 Oct; 322(5900):358. PubMed ID: 18927363
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Rethinking grant review.
    Nat Neurosci; 2008 Feb; 11(2):119. PubMed ID: 18227790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. National Institutes of Health. Zerhouni's parting message: make room for young scientists.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2008 Nov; 322(5903):834-5. PubMed ID: 18988813
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A curbstone consult to applicants for National Institute of Mental Health grant support.
    Rush AJ; Gullion CM; Prien RF
    Psychopharmacol Bull; 1996; 32(3):311-20. PubMed ID: 8961773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Research funding. Politics and funding in the U.S. public biomedical R&D system.
    Hegde D; Mowery DC
    Science; 2008 Dec; 322(5909):1797-8. PubMed ID: 19095928
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On incentives for innovation.
    Alberts B
    Science; 2009 Nov; 326(5957):1163. PubMed ID: 19965437
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Biodefense. U.S. agencies unveil plan for biosecurity peer review.
    Couzin J
    Science; 2004 Mar; 303(5664):1595. PubMed ID: 15016970
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. NIH budget. Peer review under stress.
    Miller G; Couzin J
    Science; 2007 Apr; 316(5823):358-9. PubMed ID: 17446364
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Biomedical research. NIH plans new grants for innovative minds.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2003 Aug; 301(5635):902. PubMed ID: 12920271
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer review. NIH urged to focus on new ideas, new applicants.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2008 Feb; 319(5867):1169. PubMed ID: 18309051
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Peer review at National Institutes of Health: small steps forward.
    Johnston SC; Hauser SL
    Ann Neurol; 2008 Nov; 64(5):A15-7. PubMed ID: 19067350
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. NIH revises rules of conflict of interest of grant peer reviewers.
    Shalev M
    Lab Anim (NY); 2004 Mar; 33(3):15-6. PubMed ID: 15235618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. NIH: gearing up for the twenty-first century.
    Baldwin W; McCardle P
    Physiologist; 1997 Jun; 40(3):89, 91-3. PubMed ID: 9230629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Research funding: peer review at NIH.
    Scarpa T
    Science; 2006 Jan; 311(5757):41. PubMed ID: 16400135
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. NIH response to open letter.
    Fauci AS; Zerhouni EA
    Science; 2005 Apr; 308(5718):49. PubMed ID: 15802584
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.