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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

978 related items for PubMed ID: 19696331

  • 1. NIH needs a makeover.
    Dey SK.
    Science; 2009 Aug 21; 325(5943):944. PubMed ID: 19696331
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Looking to NSF as an NIH model.
    Yost WA.
    Science; 2011 Aug 26; 333(6046):1093. PubMed ID: 21868657
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Peer review reviewed.
    Nature; 2007 Sep 13; 449(7159):115. PubMed ID: 17851475
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. NIH: gearing up for the twenty-first century.
    Baldwin W, McCardle P.
    Physiologist; 1997 Jun 13; 40(3):89, 91-3. PubMed ID: 9230629
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Peer review: NIH urged to streamline bids..
    Gavaghan H.
    Nature; 1994 Jul 21; 370(6486):170-1. PubMed ID: 8028655
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. National Institutes of Health. Two strikes and you're out, grant applicants learn.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2008 Oct 17; 322(5900):358. PubMed ID: 18927363
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. NIH revises rules of conflict of interest of grant peer reviewers.
    Shalev M.
    Lab Anim (NY); 2004 Mar 17; 33(3):15-6. PubMed ID: 15235618
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Peer review. NIH urged to focus on new ideas, new applicants.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2008 Feb 29; 319(5867):1169. PubMed ID: 18309051
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. National Institutes of Health. Zerhouni's parting message: make room for young scientists.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2008 Nov 07; 322(5903):834-5. PubMed ID: 18988813
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Science policy. Peer-review critic gets NIH 'rejects'.
    Malakoff D.
    Science; 2001 Nov 09; 294(5545):1255-7. PubMed ID: 11701895
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. NIH pilots faster feedback for grant resubmissions.
    Wadman M.
    Nature; 1997 Oct 30; 389(6654):898. PubMed ID: 9353109
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. National Institutes of Health. Panel weighs starter R01 grants.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2004 Jun 25; 304(5679):1891. PubMed ID: 15218117
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Grants, politics, and the NIH.
    Drazen JM, Ingelfinger JR.
    N Engl J Med; 2003 Dec 04; 349(23):2259-61. PubMed ID: 14657434
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. National Institutes of Health. Grants 'below payline' rise to help new investigators.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2009 Sep 25; 325(5948):1607. PubMed ID: 19779159
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. NIH budget. Senate panel adds 16% to complete doubling.
    Kaiser J.
    Science; 2002 Jul 26; 297(5581):493. PubMed ID: 12142502
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Growing pains for NIH grant review.
    Bonetta L.
    Cell; 2006 Jun 02; 125(5):823-5. PubMed ID: 16751088
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Research funding. NIH in the post-doubling era: realities and strategies.
    Zerhouni EA.
    Science; 2006 Nov 17; 314(5802):1088-90. PubMed ID: 17110557
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. NIH streamlines research grants process.
    Wadman M.
    Nature; 1998 Jul 23; 394(6691):306. PubMed ID: 9690459
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 49.