723 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21212327)
41. Science and Congress: outlook uncertain.
Science; 1990 Jan; 247(4941):404-5. PubMed ID: 2300803
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. U.S. budget. Democratic Congress begins to put its stamp on science.
Kintisch E
Science; 2007 Jun; 316(5833):1828-9. PubMed ID: 17600191
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Main agencies hang on to funds in skimpy US science budget.
Brumfiel G
Nature; 2005 Feb; 433(7026):559-60. PubMed ID: 15703709
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Comparative effectiveness casts first shadows across US industry.
Waltz E
Nat Biotechnol; 2009 Mar; 27(3):211-2. PubMed ID: 19270651
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Budget policy. U.S. science adviser tells researchers to look elsewhere.
Mervis J
Science; 2007 May; 316(5826):817-8. PubMed ID: 17495147
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. 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]
47. Bush's belt-tightening budget offers science slim pickings.
Brumfiel G
Nature; 2004 Feb; 427(6974):475. PubMed ID: 14765158
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. National Science Foundation. The money to meet the president's priorities.
Mervis J
Science; 2009 May; 324(5931):1128-9. PubMed ID: 19478153
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. U.S. science policy. Senate panel chair asks why NSF funds social sciences.
Mervis J
Science; 2006 May; 312(5775):829. PubMed ID: 16690827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. A look inside the National Cancer Institute budget process: implications for 2007 and beyond.
Niederhuber JE
Cancer Res; 2007 Feb; 67(3):856-62. PubMed ID: 17283113
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. U.S. science and austerity. Fewer dollars, forced choices.
Mervis J
Science; 2011 Nov; 334(6057):750-2. PubMed ID: 22076355
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Washington Report. Budget battles: realities and illusions.
Greenberg DS
N Engl J Med; 1979 Feb; 300(8):447-8. PubMed ID: 104179
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. U.S. budget 2009. A broken record?
Mervis J
Science; 2008 Feb; 319(5864):715. PubMed ID: 18258870
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. 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]
55. 2003 budget. War effort shapes U.S. budget, with some program casualties.
Malakoff D
Science; 2002 Feb; 295(5557):952-4. PubMed ID: 11834796
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. U.S. science policy. Dueling visions for agency.
Mervis J
Science; 2014 Mar; 343(6177):1298. PubMed ID: 24653013
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. A two-year plan for US science.
Greenberg DS
Nature; 2010 Oct; 467(7317):781-2. PubMed ID: 20944714
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. The 2010 budget. Stimulus spending looms large as Obama charts a course for science.
Mervis J
Science; 2009 May; 324(5929):864-6. PubMed ID: 19443752
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Financial realities hit US science budget.
Anderson C
Nature; 1990 Sep; 347(6290):215. PubMed ID: 2402288
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. U.S. science policy. What it means for agencies to be under the sequester.
Mervis J
Science; 2013 Mar; 339(6123):1020-1. PubMed ID: 23449566
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
