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 *

271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9592372)

  • 1. NIH peer review: time for some changes.
    Nat Biotechnol; 1998 May; 16(5):395. PubMed ID: 9592372
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. New rules propose greater scrutiny for NIH grant recipients.
    Dove A
    Nat Med; 2006 Jan; 12(1):5. PubMed ID: 16397535
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 4. Conflict-of-interest debate stirs mixed reaction at NIH.
    Macilwain C
    Nature; 1994 Feb; 367(6462):401. PubMed ID: 8107786
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Shortening of NIH RO1 grant applications: your response is important.
    Nairn RS; Sweasy JB
    DNA Repair (Amst); 2007 Jan; 6(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 17157082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. NIH opens conflict-of-interest investigation.
    Cimons M
    Nat Med; 1999 Feb; 5(2):129-30. PubMed ID: 9930847
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Why China needs an NIH.
    Nature; 2004 Apr; 428(6984):679. PubMed ID: 15085093
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Enhancing NIH grant peer review: a broader perspective.
    Bonetta L
    Cell; 2008 Oct; 135(2):201-4. PubMed ID: 18957192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Conflict of interest. Black eye for NIH.
    Anderson C
    Nature; 1991 Mar; 350(6314):100-1. PubMed ID: 2005953
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Research agenda. Opportunities for research and NIH.
    Collins FS
    Science; 2010 Jan; 327(5961):36-7. PubMed ID: 20044560
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Changes to NIH grant system may backfire.
    Karp PD; Sherlock G; Gerlt JA; Sim I; Paulsen I; Babbitt PC; Laderoute K; Hunter L; Sternberg P; Wooley J; Bourne PE
    Science; 2008 Nov; 322(5905):1187-8. PubMed ID: 19023064
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. NIH response to open letter.
    Fauci AS; Zerhouni EA
    Science; 2005 Apr; 308(5718):49. PubMed ID: 15802584
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 20. Peer review at National Institutes of Health: small steps forward.
    Johnston SC; Hauser SL
    Ann Neurol; 2008 Nov; 64(5):A15-7. PubMed ID: 19067350
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.