NIH to launch ethics review

نویسندگان

چکیده

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

NIH Peer Review

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. Funding decisions are made largely based on the outcome of a peer review process that is intended to provide a fair, equitable, timely, and unbiased review of the quality, scientific merit, and potential impact of the research. There have been concerns about the criteria reviewers are ...

متن کامل

Open letter to NIH. Review of cross-disciplinary applications.

With anticipation and excitement, the contestants spin television’s Wheel of Fortune, each with the hope that the wheel will yield a grand sum of money. Unfortunately, game show excitement does not carry over into the scientific community whose researchers are annual contestants in the federal government’s own version of Wheel of (mis)Fortune or, perhaps, Jeopardy. The word clue for this year’s...

متن کامل

Failure to Launch

Ma The importance of inflammation and inflammatory pathways in atherosclerotic disease and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is well established. The success of statin therapy rests not only on potently reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, but also on the many beneficial, pleiotropic effects statin therapy has on various inflammatory mechanisms in atherosclerotic disease, from r...

متن کامل

American Idol and NIH Grant Review

Peer review is an essential part of identifying scientific projects worthy of NIH funding. An Analysis article in the June 2, 2006 issue of Cell (Bonetta, 2006) highlighted the fact that six years after the reorganization of the NIH integrated review groups, further streamlining of NIH grant peer review is still needed. The NIH is well aware of the problems related to the peer review process, a...

متن کامل

American Idol and NIH Grant Review—Redux

Michele Pagano’s provocative Correspondence discussing ways to improve NIH grant review contains points that deserve additional consideration (Pagano, 2006). In the spirit of “fair and balanced” reporting (to use an expression of the TV network that the article references), I would like to offer an alternative view. There is no doubt that the NIH grant submission and review process is time cons...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: Genome Biology

سال: 2003

ISSN: 1465-6906

DOI: 10.1186/gb-spotlight-20031210-01