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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9393374)

  • 21. Peer review at the Research Council of Norway: Quality assurance or border control?
    Markussen RA; Wackers G
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2018 Jan; 138(1):. PubMed ID: 29313647
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. To fund or not to fund?
    Shailes S
    Elife; 2017 Sep; 6():. PubMed ID: 28956753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. NIH revises rules of conflict of interest of grant peer reviewers.
    Shalev M
    Lab Anim (NY); 2004 Mar; 33(3):15-6. PubMed ID: 15235618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Peer review at NIH: a conversation with CSR director Toni Scarpa.
    Scarpa T
    Physiologist; 2010 Jun; 53(3):65, 67-9. PubMed ID: 20550006
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Spine journals: is reviewer agreement on publication recommendations greater than would be expected by chance?
    Weiner BK; Weiner JP; Smith HE
    Spine J; 2010 Mar; 10(3):209-11. PubMed ID: 20207330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Recent trends in National Institutes of Health funding of surgical research.
    Rangel SJ; Efron B; Moss RL
    Ann Surg; 2002 Sep; 236(3):277-86; discussion 286-7. PubMed ID: 12192314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. An experimental test of the effects of redacting grant applicant identifiers on peer review outcomes.
    Nakamura RK; Mann LS; Lindner MD; Braithwaite J; Chen MC; Vancea A; Byrnes N; Durrant V; Reed B
    Elife; 2021 Oct; 10():. PubMed ID: 34665132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Inter- and intraobserver agreement on the Load Sharing Classification of thoracolumbar spine fractures.
    Elzinga M; Segers M; Siebenga J; Heilbron E; de Lange-de Klerk ES; Bakker F
    Injury; 2012 Apr; 43(4):416-22. PubMed ID: 21645896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Teleconference versus face-to-face scientific peer review of grant application: effects on review outcomes.
    Gallo SA; Carpenter AS; Glisson SR
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(8):e71693. PubMed ID: 23951223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. On the agreement between bibliometrics and peer review: Evidence from the Italian research assessment exercises.
    Baccini A; Barabesi L; De Nicolao G
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(11):e0242520. PubMed ID: 33206715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Guilt by association.
    van Rijswijk L
    Ostomy Wound Manage; 1998 Apr; 44(4):4, 6. PubMed ID: 9611600
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Reporting clinical trials: full access to all of the data.
    Rosenberg RN; Aminoff M; Boller F; Soerensen PS; Griggs RC; Hachinski V; Hallett M; Johnson RT; Kennard C; Lang AE; Lees AJ; Lisak R; Newsom-Davis J; Pedley TA; Selzer ME; Zochodne D
    Arch Neurol; 2002 Jan; 59(1):27-8. PubMed ID: 11790226
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Triaging Shakespeare.
    Raman IM
    Elife; 2015 Mar; 4():. PubMed ID: 25781342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Chance and consensus in peer review.
    Cole S; Cole JR; Simon GA
    Science; 1981 Nov; 214(4523):881-6. PubMed ID: 7302566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Networking and knowledge exchange to promote the formation of transdisciplinary coalitions and levels of agreement among transdisciplinary peer reviewers.
    Lobb R; Petermann L; Manafo E; Keen D; Kerner J
    J Public Health Manag Pract; 2013; 19(1):E9-20. PubMed ID: 22990496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 37. The Participation and Motivations of Grant Peer Reviewers: A Comprehensive Survey.
    Gallo SA; Thompson LA; Schmaling KB; Glisson SR
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2020 Apr; 26(2):761-782. PubMed ID: 31359327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The good, the bad and the ugly.
    Gmel G
    Addiction; 2010 Feb; 105(2):203-5; author reply 205-6. PubMed ID: 20078477
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Grant Review Feedback: Appropriateness and Usefulness.
    Gallo SA; Schmaling KB; Thompson LA; Glisson SR
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2021 Mar; 27(2):18. PubMed ID: 33733708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Knowing it and proving it are two different things.
    Clay PG
    J Am Pharm Assoc (2003); 2015; 55(4):464. PubMed ID: 26161492
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.