477 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17475944)
1. Flat NIH funding threatens scientific progress.
J Nucl Med; 2007 May; 48(5):15N, 22N. PubMed ID: 17475944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. New president, new congress..... new hope for science?
Wolinetz CD
Physiologist; 2009 Feb; 52(1):1, 3-5. PubMed ID: 19271423
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Oh no! Not another acronym?
Wallner PE
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Sep; 1(9):629. PubMed ID: 17411670
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Windfall warning.
Nature; 2009 Oct; 461(7266):847-8. PubMed ID: 19829323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. A lost generation.
Weinberg RA
Cell; 2006 Jul; 126(1):9-10. PubMed ID: 16839866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. U.S. research funding. Science adviser says that pruning is the key to a healthy budget.
Mervis J
Science; 2007 Feb; 315(5814):927. PubMed ID: 17303728
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 1997 budget confirms US science faces a period of flat funding.
Macilwain C
Nature; 1996 Mar; 380(6571):187. PubMed ID: 8637559
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Factors associated with amount of research funding obtained from the National Institutes of Health by colleges and schools of veterinary medicine.
Coyne CP; Cadillac JM
Am J Vet Res; 2008 Dec; 69(12):1676-86. PubMed ID: 19046018
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Research funding. NIH in the post-doubling era: realities and strategies.
Zerhouni EA
Science; 2006 Nov; 314(5802):1088-90. PubMed ID: 17110557
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Italian science: greater expectations?
Gambardella P
Nat Mater; 2006 Oct; 5(10):757. PubMed ID: 17013400
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The NIH, research institutions and industry: working together on a shared goal.
Omary MB
Gastroenterology; 2007 May; 132(5):1647-50. PubMed ID: 17484859
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinton proposes $2.8 billion increase in science funding.
Dalton R
Nature; 2000 Jan; 403(6768):349. PubMed ID: 10667757
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The more things change..
Frank M
Physiologist; 2011 Feb; 54(1):11-2. PubMed ID: 21384774
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Reform science? First, reset the economy.
Rosei F
Nat Mater; 2006 Oct; 5(10):757-8. PubMed ID: 17013399
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Funding opportunities: angiogenesis in the nervous system in health and disease.
Liu CY
Neurosurgery; 2008 Apr; 62(4):N7-8. PubMed ID: 18496176
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Changes in the research landscape require a new approach, while continuing to fund the highest scientific priorities. Jennifer Taylor talks with Dr Elizabeth Nabel, Director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Library.
Nabel E
Eur Heart J; 2009 Jun; 30(12):1423-5. PubMed ID: 19533911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Addressing the decline in NIH pain research funding.
Max MB
J Pain; 2008 Dec; 9(12):1074-6. PubMed ID: 19038769
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Why French politics and science don't mix.
Nat Mater; 2004 May; 3(5):275. PubMed ID: 15122212
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Less rosy view of science funding.
Miller HI
Nature; 1996 Jul; 382(6586):18. PubMed ID: 8657296
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
