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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

410 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27297230)

  • 1. Applying for, reviewing and funding public health research in Germany and beyond.
    Gerhardus A; Becher H; Groenewegen P; Mansmann U; Meyer T; Pfaff H; Puhan M; Razum O; Rehfuess E; Sauerborn R; Strech D; Wissing F; Zeeb H; Hummers-Pradier E
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2016 Jun; 14(1):43. PubMed ID: 27297230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology
    J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jun; 21(12):2377-86. PubMed ID: 12721281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Grant Writing Tips for Translational Research.
    Wescott L; Laskofski M; Senator D; Curran C
    Methods Mol Biol; 2017; 1606():367-378. PubMed ID: 28502013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A research roadmap for complementary and alternative medicine - what we need to know by 2020.
    Fischer F; Lewith G; Witt CM; Linde K; von Ammon K; Cardini F; Falkenberg T; Fønnebø V; Johannessen H; Reiter B; Uehleke B; Weidenhammer W; Brinkhaus B
    Forsch Komplementmed; 2014; 21(2):e1-16. PubMed ID: 24851850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Gender differences in grant and personnel award funding rates at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research based on research content area: A retrospective analysis.
    Burns KEA; Straus SE; Liu K; Rizvi L; Guyatt G
    PLoS Med; 2019 Oct; 16(10):e1002935. PubMed ID: 31613898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Grant writing and grant peer review as questionable research practices.
    Conix S; De Block A; Vaesen K
    F1000Res; 2021; 10():1126. PubMed ID: 35186273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An output evaluation of a health research foundation's enhanced grant review process for new investigators.
    Hammond GW; Lê ML; Novotny T; Caligiuri SPB; Pierce GN; Wade J
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2017 Jun; 15(1):57. PubMed ID: 28629438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ten questions institutional review boards should ask when reviewing international clinical research protocols.
    Fitzgerald DW; Wasunna A; Pape JW
    IRB; 2003; 25(2):14-8. PubMed ID: 12833903
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Ethics issues identified by applicants and ethics experts in Horizon 2020 grant proposals.
    Buljan I; Pina DG; Marušić A
    F1000Res; 2021; 10():471. PubMed ID: 34394917
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reconsidering 'ethics' and 'quality' in healthcare research: the case for an iterative ethical paradigm.
    Stevenson FA; Gibson W; Pelletier C; Chrysikou V; Park S
    BMC Med Ethics; 2015 May; 16():21. PubMed ID: 25952678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Surveys of current status in biomedical science grant review: funding organisations' and grant reviewers' perspectives.
    Schroter S; Groves T; Højgaard L
    BMC Med; 2010 Oct; 8():62. PubMed ID: 20961441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Journalists, district attorneys and researchers: why IRBs should get in the middle.
    Chodos AH; Lee SJ
    BMC Med Ethics; 2015 Mar; 16():19. PubMed ID: 25889147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The art of obtaining grants.
    Devine EB
    Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2009 Mar; 66(6):580-7. PubMed ID: 19265188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Prioritization and Consentation of Criteria for the Appraisal, Funding and Evaluation of Projects from the German Innovationsfonds: A multi-perspective Delphi study].
    Schmitt J; Petzold T; Nellessen-Martens G; Pfaff H
    Gesundheitswesen; 2015 Sep; 77(8-9):570-9. PubMed ID: 26270043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: an observational study.
    Barnett AG; Herbert DL; Campbell M; Daly N; Roberts JA; Mudge A; Graves N
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2015 Feb; 15():55. PubMed ID: 25888975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Wellcome Trust population initiative.
    Ogilvie BM; Scott IG
    Hum Reprod; 1997 Nov; 12(11 Suppl):95-8. PubMed ID: 9433964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. It's money! Real-world grant experience through a student-run, peer-reviewed program.
    Dumanis SB; Ullrich L; Washington PM; Forcelli PA
    CBE Life Sci Educ; 2013; 12(3):419-28. PubMed ID: 24006391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing health research grant applications: A retrospective comparative review of a one-stage versus a two-stage application assessment process.
    Morgan B; Yu LM; Solomon T; Ziebland S
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0230118. PubMed ID: 32163468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.