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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8016650)

  • 1. Does NIH shortchange clinicians?
    Marshall E
    Science; 1994 Jul; 265(5168):20-1. PubMed ID: 8016650
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. NIH plans one grant for all sizes.
    Marshall E
    Science; 1997 Nov; 278(5340):1006. PubMed ID: 9381196
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Peer review: NIH urged to streamline bids..
    Gavaghan H
    Nature; 1994 Jul; 370(6486):170-1. PubMed ID: 8028655
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. NIH rating system.
    Gibson AR
    Science; 1996 Aug; 273(5275):562. PubMed ID: 8701302
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. NIH needs a makeover.
    Dey SK
    Science; 2009 Aug; 325(5943):944. PubMed ID: 19696331
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. NIH budget. Peer review under stress.
    Miller G; Couzin J
    Science; 2007 Apr; 316(5823):358-9. PubMed ID: 17446364
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Looking to NSF as an NIH model.
    Yost WA
    Science; 2011 Aug; 333(6046):1093. PubMed ID: 21868657
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer review. NIH urged to focus on new ideas, new applicants.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2008 Feb; 319(5867):1169. PubMed ID: 18309051
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Growing pains for NIH grant review.
    Bonetta L
    Cell; 2006 Jun; 125(5):823-5. PubMed ID: 16751088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Science policy. The NIH budget in the "postdoubling" era.
    Korn D; Rich RR; Garrison HH; Golub SH; Hendrix MJ; Heinig SJ; Masters BS; Turman RJ
    Science; 2002 May; 296(5572):1401-2. PubMed ID: 12029114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Science policy. Peer-review critic gets NIH 'rejects'.
    Malakoff D
    Science; 2001 Nov; 294(5545):1255-7. PubMed ID: 11701895
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Biomedical funding. At NIH, two strikes policy is out.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2014 Apr; 344(6182):350. PubMed ID: 24763564
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Biomedical research. NIH plans new grants for innovative minds.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2003 Aug; 301(5635):902. PubMed ID: 12920271
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. National Institutes of Health. Panel weighs starter R01 grants.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2004 Jun; 304(5679):1891. PubMed ID: 15218117
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A metareview at the NIH.
    Nat Med; 2008 Apr; 14(4):351. PubMed ID: 18391922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Funding system in the National Institutes of Health.
    Thomas DA
    J Oral Sci; 1998 Sep; 40(3):129-30. PubMed ID: 9838749
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. On incentives for innovation.
    Alberts B
    Science; 2009 Nov; 326(5957):1163. PubMed ID: 19965437
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. NIH: gearing up for the twenty-first century.
    Baldwin W; McCardle P
    Physiologist; 1997 Jun; 40(3):89, 91-3. PubMed ID: 9230629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Rethinking grant peer review.
    Fliesler SJ
    Science; 1997 Mar; 275(5305):1399. PubMed ID: 9072799
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. National Institutes of Health. Grants 'below payline' rise to help new investigators.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2009 Sep; 325(5948):1607. PubMed ID: 19779159
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.