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 *

268 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28061509)

  • 1. Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review.
    Tricco AC; Thomas SM; Antony J; Rios P; Robson R; Pattani R; Ghassemi M; Sullivan S; Selvaratnam I; Tannenbaum C; Straus SE
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(1):e0169718. PubMed ID: 28061509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of double-blind peer review on gender bias in scientific publishing: a systematic review.
    Kern-Goldberger AR; James R; Berghella V; Miller ES
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Jul; 227(1):43-50.e4. PubMed ID: 35120887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.
    Tricco AC; Lillie E; Zarin W; O'Brien K; Colquhoun H; Kastner M; Levac D; Ng C; Sharpe JP; Wilson K; Kenny M; Warren R; Wilson C; Stelfox HT; Straus SE
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Feb; 16():15. PubMed ID: 26857112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of potential bias in research grant peer review in Canada.
    Tamblyn R; Girard N; Qian CJ; Hanley J
    CMAJ; 2018 Apr; 190(16):E489-E499. PubMed ID: 29685909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?
    Allen D; Rixson L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2008 Mar; 6(1):78-110. PubMed ID: 21631815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A 10-year longitudinal evaluation of science policy interventions to promote sex and gender in health research.
    Haverfield J; Tannenbaum C
    Health Res Policy Syst; 2021 Jun; 19(1):94. PubMed ID: 34130706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The impact of gender on scientific writing: An observational study of grant proposals.
    Franco MC; Rice DB; Schuch HS; Dellagostin OA; Cenci MS; Moher D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Aug; 136():37-43. PubMed ID: 33545271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Are Female Applicants Disadvantaged in National Institutes of Health Peer Review? Combining Algorithmic Text Mining and Qualitative Methods to Detect Evaluative Differences in R01 Reviewers' Critiques.
    Magua W; Zhu X; Bhattacharya A; Filut A; Potvien A; Leatherberry R; Lee YG; Jens M; Malikireddy D; Carnes M; Kaatz A
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2017 May; 26(5):560-570. PubMed ID: 28281870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Conscious sedation guidance.
    Coulthard P
    Evid Based Dent; 2006; 7(4):90-1. PubMed ID: 17187034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. Telemedicine for the Medicare population: pediatric, obstetric, and clinician-indirect home interventions.
    Hersh WR; Wallace JA; Patterson PK; Shapiro SE; Kraemer DF; Eilers GM; Chan BK; Greenlick MR; Helfand M
    Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ); 2001 Aug; (24 Suppl):1-32. PubMed ID: 11569328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Systematic review on embracing cultural diversity for developing and sustaining a healthy work environment in healthcare.
    Pearson A; Srivastava R; Craig D; Tucker D; Grinspun D; Bajnok I; Griffin P; Long L; Porritt K; Han T; Gi AA
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2007 Mar; 5(1):54-91. PubMed ID: 21631782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Gender differences in peer reviewed grant applications, awards, and amounts: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Schmaling KB; Gallo SA
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2023 May; 8(1):2. PubMed ID: 37131184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer review of grant applications: criteria used and qualitative study of reviewer practices.
    Abdoul H; Perrey C; Amiel P; Tubach F; Gottot S; Durand-Zaleski I; Alberti C
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(9):e46054. PubMed ID: 23029386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Male applicants are more likely to be awarded fellowships than female applicants: A case study of a Japanese national funding agency.
    Kyogoku D; Wada Y
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(10):e0291372. PubMed ID: 37878541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Exploring Gender Bias in Six Key Domains of Academic Science: An Adversarial Collaboration.
    Ceci SJ; Kahn S; Williams WM
    Psychol Sci Public Interest; 2023 Jul; 24(1):15-73. PubMed ID: 37098793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Grant Review Feedback: Appropriateness and Usefulness.
    Gallo SA; Schmaling KB; Thompson LA; Glisson SR
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2021 Mar; 27(2):18. PubMed ID: 33733708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Does Gender Matter in Grant Peer Review?: An Empirical Investigation Using the Example of the Austrian Science Fund.
    Mutz R; Bornmann L; Daniel HD
    Z Psychol; 2012; 220(2):121-129. PubMed ID: 23480982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.