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.
99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9380149)
1. [Peer review when applying for a subsidy]. Klasen EC Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1997 Jun; 141(23):1161-2. PubMed ID: 9380149 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Peer review in request for subsidy]. Monnens LA Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1997 Aug; 141(32):1581-2. PubMed ID: 9543756 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. [Peer review in requests for subsidy]. Jennekens FG; Busch HF Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1997 Mar; 141(13):643-4. PubMed ID: 9190541 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Peer review]. Boer EJ Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1989 Dec; 133(49):2455-9. PubMed ID: 2594115 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [Peer review in requests for subsidies. Zorg-onderzoek Nederland]. Smid HJ; Janssens MB Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1997 Oct; 141(42):2037. PubMed ID: 9599123 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Peer review and scientific method in clinical research. Morgan PP Can Med Assoc J; 1981 Feb; 124(3):251-3. PubMed ID: 7459784 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Proposals, peer review, and research results. Roy R Science; 1979 Jun; 204(4398):1154, 1156-7. PubMed ID: 451561 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Toward benchmarking medical research--defining and applying key performance indicators in the measurement of research output. French P Am Clin Lab; 1998 Aug; 17(7):12-4. PubMed ID: 10182366 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Peer review: inter-reviewer agreement during evaluation of research grant applications. Wiener SL; Urivetzky M; Bregman D; Cohen J; Eich R; Gootman N; Gulotta S; Taylor B; Tuttle R; Webb W; Wright J Clin Res; 1977 Dec; 25(5):306-11. PubMed ID: 10304719 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Peer review is a two-way process. Grant D Nature; 1997 Aug; 388(6645):822. PubMed ID: 9278037 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The crisis of the peer review system. Lepow IH Fed Proc; 1973 Aug; 32(8):1827. PubMed ID: 4718901 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. [The peer review system inhibits creative research. Let the scientists take care of the "risk capital"]. Dahlgren C Lakartidningen; 1993 Nov; 90(44):3829-30. PubMed ID: 8231530 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Peer review is a two-way process. Fielder A; Vinyard H Nature; 1997 Aug; 388(6645):822. PubMed ID: 9278036 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Does peer review at the US National Institutes of Health need modifying? Reprod Biomed Online; 2008 Feb; 16(2):238. PubMed ID: 18284879 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Is peer review in crisis? Mulligan A Oral Oncol; 2005 Feb; 41(2):135-41. PubMed ID: 15695114 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Short cuts for peer review. McDuffie FC J Rheumatol; 1983 Jun; 10(3):358-9. PubMed ID: 6887159 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Proposals for improving the Peer Review System of the National Institutes of Health. Kirschstein RL Clin Res; 1977 Dec; 25(5):295-6. PubMed ID: 10304717 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Cancer fraud case stuns research community, prompts reflection on peer review process. Vastag B J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Mar; 98(6):374-6. PubMed ID: 16537825 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [Subsidy allocations by the Netherlands Heart Foundation 1980-1985]. Chaillet JL Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1986 Aug; 130(33):1492-3. PubMed ID: 3762749 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]