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 *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 937242)

  • 21. Recent changes in NIH peer review system.
    Demsey A
    Physiologist; 1988 Dec; 31(6):155-6. PubMed ID: 3237781
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Peer review: a crisis in confidence.
    Kirschstein RL
    Clin Res; 1986 Oct; 34(4):477-83. PubMed ID: 3780138
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. National Institutes of Health: the lottery.
    Heilman KM
    Ann Neurol; 2007 Jul; 62(1):106. PubMed ID: 17474112
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Creativity and peer review.
    Fusaro RM
    Nat Biotechnol; 1999 Dec; 17(12):1146. PubMed ID: 10585676
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Editorial: Peer review under fire.
    Feldmann EG
    J Pharm Sci; 1973 Dec; 62(12):1. PubMed ID: 4762173
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Re: NCNR's review process.
    Cleland V
    Nurs Res; 1989; 38(6):358, 381. PubMed ID: 2587291
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. NSF probes peer review; NIH investigates awards.
    Change; 1976 Feb; 8(1):60-1. PubMed ID: 1030336
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. The grant racket.
    Ross PM
    Nature; 1992 Jan; 355(6357):197. PubMed ID: 1731211
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. The National Cancer Act of 1971 with changes made by the National Cancer Act Amendments of 1974.
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1977 Aug; 59(2 Suppl):701-7. PubMed ID: 886628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Biomedical politics. NIH roiled by inquiries over grants hit list.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2003 Oct; 302(5646):758. PubMed ID: 14593135
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Congress slashes "silly titles".
    Anderson C
    Nature; 1992 May; 357(6376):271. PubMed ID: 1589030
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Federal work force. Can outsiders do better in managing NIH grants?
    Kaiser J
    Science; 2003 Mar; 299(5614):1823. PubMed ID: 12649448
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Some problems facins biomedical research.
    Longo LD
    Fed Proc; 1973 Nov; 32(11):2078-85. PubMed ID: 4752005
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.