196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2030740)
1. Dr Baltimore says "sorry".
Baltimore D
Nature; 1991 May; 351(6322):94-5. PubMed ID: 2030740
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Baltimore defeat a defeat for research.
Nature; 1991 Dec; 354(6353):419-20. PubMed ID: 1660961
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. How congressional pressure shaped the 'Baltimore case'.
Friedly J
Science; 1996 Aug; 273(5277):873-5. PubMed ID: 8711476
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Federal inquiry finds misconduct by a discoverer of the AIDS virus.
Hilts P
N Y Times Web; 1992 Dec; ():A1, A20. PubMed ID: 11646949
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Misconduct finding in the Gallo case.
Greenberg D
Lancet; 1993 Jan; 341(8838):166-7. PubMed ID: 8093759
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. 'Verdicts' are in on the Gallo probe.
Palca J
Science; 1992 May; 256(5058):735-8. PubMed ID: 1589751
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Baltimore throws in the towel.
Hamilton DP
Science; 1991 May; 252(5007):768, 770. PubMed ID: 1851328
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Margot O'Toole's record of events.
O'Toole M
Nature; 1991 May; 351(6323):180-3. PubMed ID: 1645847
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Clearing of researcher in 'Baltimore affair' boosts demand for reforms.
Steele F
Nature; 1996 Jun; 381(6585):719-20. PubMed ID: 8657264
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The Imanishi-Kari affair. Baltimore declares O'Toole mistaken.
Baltimore D
Nature; 1991 May; 351(6325):341-3. PubMed ID: 2034280
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Scientific misconduct: new court challenge for OSI.
Anderson C
Nature; 1992 Apr; 356(6369):466. PubMed ID: 11642987
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. No misconduct or fraud in Baltimore case.
Anderson A
Nature; 1988 Dec; 336(6199):505. PubMed ID: 11644320
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Collins' student sanctioned over 'most severe' case of fraud.
Dalton R
Nature; 1997 Jul; 388(6640):313. PubMed ID: 9237737
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. The assault on David Baltimore.
Kevles DJ
New Yorker; 1996 May; 72(13):94-98, 100-104, 106-109. PubMed ID: 11654450
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. A costly settlement ends whistle-blower suit.
Taubes G
Science; 1994 Feb; 263(5147):605. PubMed ID: 8303265
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Resounding echoes of Gallo case.
Greenberg DS
Lancet; 1995 Mar; 345(8950):639. PubMed ID: 7898185
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Scientists 'too quick' to back claims.
Nadis S
Nature; 1996 Nov; 384(6604):6. PubMed ID: 8900257
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Verdict in sight in the "Baltimore case".
Hamilton DP
Science; 1991 Mar; 251(4998):1168-72. PubMed ID: 1900949
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
