194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30089925)
1. Who would you share your funding with?
Bollen J
Nature; 2018 Aug; 560(7717):143. PubMed ID: 30089925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact factors: target the funding bodies.
Insall R
Nature; 2003 Jun; 423(6940):585. PubMed ID: 12789312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Research funding: Making the cut.
Powell K
Nature; 2010 Sep; 467(7314):383-5. PubMed ID: 20864969
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. NIH responds to critics on peer review.
Wadman M
Nature; 2008 Jun; 453(7197):835. PubMed ID: 18548033
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Supporting the future.
Nature; 2008 Jun; 453(7198):958. PubMed ID: 18563096
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Peer review reviewed.
Nature; 2007 Sep; 449(7159):115. PubMed ID: 17851475
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Funding: the research revolution.
Brumfiel G
Nature; 2008 Jun; 453(7198):975-6. PubMed ID: 18563124
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Science policy: Well-funded investigators should receive extra scrutiny.
Berg JM
Nature; 2012 Sep; 489(7415):203. PubMed ID: 22972279
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. More time for research: fund people not projects.
Ioannidis JP
Nature; 2011 Sep; 477(7366):529-31. PubMed ID: 21956312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. NIH: grants revamp needs grounding in evidence.
Hannun YA
Nature; 2008 Apr; 452(7189):811. PubMed ID: 18421328
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Fund ideas, not pedigree, to find fresh insight.
Sinkjær T
Nature; 2018 Mar; 555(7695):143. PubMed ID: 29517033
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Gender bias goes away when grant reviewers focus on the science.
Guglielmi G
Nature; 2018 Feb; 554(7690):14-15. PubMed ID: 29388971
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The secrets of success.
Smaglik P
Nature; 2004 Nov; 432(7014):253. PubMed ID: 15538377
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. EURYI: present procedure risks conflicts of interest.
Lente G
Nature; 2005 Sep; 437(7056):192. PubMed ID: 16148909
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Making an impact.
Wu R
Nature; 2004 Mar; 428(6979):206-7. PubMed ID: 15014507
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. NIH plans grant-review overhaul to reduce bias.
Kozlov M
Nature; 2022 Dec; 612(7941):602-603. PubMed ID: 36494447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. NIH: Drop re-review for big grant holders.
Roy HK
Nature; 2012 Oct; 490(7419):176. PubMed ID: 23060177
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Science funding: Duel to the death.
Bhattacharya A
Nature; 2012 Aug; 488(7409):20-2. PubMed ID: 22859184
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Artificial intelligence is selecting grant reviewers in China.
Cyranoski D
Nature; 2019 May; 569(7756):316-317. PubMed ID: 31089232
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Peer review: Revise rules on conflicts of interest.
Žliobaitė I; Fortelius M
Nature; 2016 Nov; 539(7628):168. PubMed ID: 27830803
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
