393 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2273294)
1. Cancer centers and cancer research: the need for recognition and increased funding.
Durbin RJ
Int J Cell Cloning; 1990 Nov; 8(6):387-91. PubMed ID: 2273294
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Bottom-line reality tempers cancer researchers' excitement.
Benowitz S
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Sep; 101(17):1166-9. PubMed ID: 19679851
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Funding mechanisms for research through the National Cancer Institute.
Clifford CK
Cancer Res; 1993 May; 53(10 Suppl):2434s-2435s. PubMed ID: 8485731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Why aren't there more scientists advocating for funding?
Wells RD; Farnham P
Science; 2006 Nov; 314(5802):1081. PubMed ID: 17110554
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. This is not your mentors' NIH--new strategies for research support.
Rivkees SA
J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab; 2006 Oct; 19(10):1187-9. PubMed ID: 17172079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Healy attacks NASA's claims; bad news for research budgets.
Mervis J
Nature; 1992 Aug; 358(6386):441. PubMed ID: 1641030
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Quantum grants: request for applications from the NIBIB.
Harrington DP
J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Jun; 3(6):398-9. PubMed ID: 17412092
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Windfall warning.
Nature; 2009 Oct; 461(7266):847-8. PubMed ID: 19829323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Responding to stimuli.
Mahapatra A
ACS Chem Biol; 2009 Apr; 4(4):233. PubMed ID: 19371128
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Public money, public values.
Abrams SE
Public Health Nurs; 2004; 21(6):511-2. PubMed ID: 15566554
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Biologists wary that cash up front could mean cuts later.
Check E
Nature; 2003 Feb; 421(6924):677. PubMed ID: 12610581
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A lost generation.
Weinberg RA
Cell; 2006 Jul; 126(1):9-10. PubMed ID: 16839866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Increasing R01 competition concerns researchers.
Vastag B
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Oct; 98(20):1436-8. PubMed ID: 17047187
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. AIDS research funding. Budget division disputed.
Concar D
Nature; 1990 Apr; 344(6269):803. PubMed ID: 2330036
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. AIDS appropriations measures deferred for Congressional recess.
AIDS Policy Law; 1996 Aug; 11(14):3. PubMed ID: 11363680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Review proposes shift in US cancer funding.
Taylor R
Nature; 1995 May; 375(6529):267. PubMed ID: 7753181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomedical funding. A bumpy landing for cancer research.
Kaiser J
Science; 2004 Feb; 303(5660):936-7. PubMed ID: 14963292
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
