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.
23. Who reads your project-grant application to the National Institutes of Health? Eaves GN Fed Proc; 1972; 31(1):2-9. PubMed ID: 5009665 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Letter: Peer review system utilized by the NIH and the NSF. Fed Proc; 1973 Dec; 32(12):2142-3. PubMed ID: 4753768 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Treatment of young investigators in the National Cancer Program. Kalberer JT J Natl Cancer Inst; 1979 Oct; 63(4):1097-103. PubMed ID: 480383 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Peer review in health services research: issues and problems. Eichhorn RL; Maurana CA Health Serv Res; 1981; 16(3):267-75. PubMed ID: 7298338 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. The grant racket. Ross PM Nature; 1992 Jan; 355(6357):197. PubMed ID: 1731211 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. A proposal for per capita distribution of research funds with administrative flexibility. Hirsch HR Fed Proc; 1984 Apr; 43(5):7a-8a. PubMed ID: 6705928 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. National Cancer Act 1971-1996. National Cancer Institute/American Cancer Society relationship--June 1996. Eyre HJ Cancer; 1996 Dec; 78(12):2609-10. PubMed ID: 8952577 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Congress slashes "silly titles". Anderson C Nature; 1992 May; 357(6376):271. PubMed ID: 1589030 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]