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.
5. No political interference in US agricultural grants. Vidaver A Nature; 2005 Jan; 433(7022):105. PubMed ID: 15650714 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. US officials urge biologists to vet publications for bioterror risk. Check E Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6920):197. PubMed ID: 12529597 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Subpoenas and science--when lawyers force their way into the laboratory. Black B N Engl J Med; 1997 Mar; 336(10):725-7. PubMed ID: 9041107 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. U.S. science policy. Bill would set new rules for choosing NSF grants. Mervis J Science; 2013 May; 340(6132):534. PubMed ID: 23641083 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Australian scientists protest at loss of funding board. Dennis C Nature; 2005 Jul; 436(7050):451. PubMed ID: 16049440 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Science, politics, and federal advisory committees. Steinbrook R N Engl J Med; 2004 Apr; 350(14):1454-60. PubMed ID: 15070798 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Scientific peer review to inform regulatory decision making: leadership responsibilities and cautions. Patton DE; Olin SS Risk Anal; 2006 Feb; 26(1):5-16. PubMed ID: 16492173 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]