132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 933910)
1. Catch 22 in the NIH peer review system.
Rosenberg E
Med Hypotheses; 1976; 2(1):27-8. PubMed ID: 933910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The readers' NIH.
Chan TC
Science; 1992 Oct; 258(5082):530. PubMed ID: 1411552
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The readers NIH.
Hofmann AF
Science; 1992 Oct; 258(5082):532. PubMed ID: 1411560
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer review system.
Gross J
Science; 1971 Jul; 173(3992):106-7. PubMed ID: 5581904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Sample size and precision in NIH peer review.
Kaplan D; Lacetera N; Kaplan C
PLoS One; 2008 Jul; 3(7):e2761. PubMed ID: 18648494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. NIH funding mechanisms need appraisal.
Brown DD
Science; 1993 Jul; 261(5117):16, 112. PubMed ID: 8316845
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The myths of science.
Greenberg DS
Lancet; 1990 May; 335(8700):1267-8. PubMed ID: 1971333
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Perspective: is NIH funding the "best science by the best scientists"? A critique of the NIH R01 research grant review policies.
Costello LC
Acad Med; 2010 May; 85(5):775-9. PubMed ID: 20520024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Peer review reviewed.
Mehl JW
Fed Proc; 1975 Aug; 34(9):i-iv. PubMed ID: 1149887
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. NIH and the scientist--and a crisis of apathy.
Waitzman MB
Fed Proc; 1974 Jun; 33(6):1677-8. PubMed ID: 4827512
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Management operations of the National Cancer Institute that influence the governance of science.
Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1984 May; 64():1-139. PubMed ID: 6749243
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical research and the review process--a guided tour.
Novello AC
Am J Nephrol; 1982; 2(3):164-70. PubMed ID: 7180913
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. A different peer review.
Page IH
JAMA; 1973 Sep; 225(10):1240-1. PubMed ID: 4740988
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The changing face of peer review at the National Institutes of Health.
Leppert PC
Fertil Steril; 2004 Feb; 81(2):279-86. PubMed ID: 14967360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Editorial: Judicium parium.
Fishman AP
N Engl J Med; 1974 Jan; 290(2):105-6. PubMed ID: 4808447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Research funding.
FASEB J; 1991 Sep; 5(12):2741-2. PubMed ID: 1916097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The single instrument grant.
Wade L
Cancer; 1972 Apr; 29(4):879-81. PubMed ID: 5067105
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. National Institutes of Health. Changes in peer review target young scientists, heavyweights.
Kaiser J
Science; 2008 Jun; 320(5882):1404. PubMed ID: 18556519
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Nurturing the biomedical research enterprise.
Wyngaarden JB
P R Health Sci J; 1986 Aug; 5(2):43-50. PubMed ID: 3823360
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Role of the National Cancer Institute in the development of cancer centers. VI. Review and evaluation of cancer research center grant applications.
Jay GD
Cancer; 1972 Apr; 29(4):896-901. PubMed ID: 5017355
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
