Books on the topic 'Grant peer review'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 books for your research on the topic 'Grant peer review.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse books on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Peer Review Procedures. Improving research through peer review. National Academy Press, 1987.
Find full textNational Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institites of Health, 1987.
Find full textNational Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 1988.
Find full textNational Cancer Institute (U.S.), ed. Share your expertise with us. National Cancer Insitute, 2001.
Find full textUnited States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs, ed. Peer review: Reforms needed to ensure fairness in federal agency grant selection : report to the Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. The Office, 1994.
Find full textCenter for Scientific Review (National Institutes of Health). What happens to your grant application: A primer for new applicants. 8th ed. Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 2011.
Find full textRichard, Mandel. A half century of peer review, 1946-1996. Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, 1996.
Find full textLangfeldt, Liv. Fagfellevurdering som forskningspolitisk virkemiddel: En studie av fordelingen av frie midler i Norges forskningsråd. NIFU, Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning, 1998.
Find full textCenter, Horace Mann Learning, ed. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. Horace Mann Learning Center, 1988.
Find full textCenter, Horace Mann Learning. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. Horace Mann Learning Center, U.S. Department of Education, 1991.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. The Office, 1992.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. The Office, 1992.
Find full textHill, Anne. Addressing common problems: Guidance for submitting European Commission fifth framework proposals. Outreach Press, 2001.
Find full textS, Frankel Mark, and Cave Jane, eds. Evaluating science and scientists: An east-west dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Central European University Press, 1997.
Find full textD, Muraskin Lana, United States. National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, and Educational Resources Information Center (U.S.), eds. Strengthening the standards: Recommendations for OERI peer review : summary report, draft January 30, 1999. U.S. Dept. of Education, National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, 1999.
Find full textShestopal, A. V., та V. I. Konnov. Sot︠s︡ialʹno-politicheskai︠a︡ funkt︠s︡ii︠a︡ nat︠s︡ionalʹnykh nauchnykh fondov: Sbornik nauchnykh stateĭ. Izdatelʹstvo "MGIMO-Universitet", 2016.
Find full text1956-, Evans Martyn, ed. A decent proposal: Ethical review of clinical research. Wiley, 1996.
Find full textNational Research Council (U.S.). Committee on the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology's Peer Review Program., ed. Peer review in the Department of Energy, Office of Science and Technology: Interim report. National Academy Press, 1997.
Find full textD, Muraskin Lana, August and Associates, and United States. National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, eds. Strengthening the standards: Recommendations for OERI Peer Review : summary report prepared for the National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board. The Board, 1999.
Find full textBadji, Toure Lalla, and African Development Foundation, eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. African Development Foundation, 1995.
Find full textBadji, Toure Lalla, and African Development Foundation (U.S.), eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. African Development Foundation, 1995.
Find full textN, Karaalp Remzi, and Wilden Anke 1981-, eds. Regelungsstrukturen der Forschungsförderung: Staatliche Projektfinanzierung mittels Peer-Review in Deutschland, Frankreich und der EU. Nomos, 2010.
Find full textNational Institutes of Health (U.S.). Division of Research Grants, ed. Orientation handbook for members of scientific review groups: National Institutes of Health. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 1989.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Peer review practices at federal science agencies vary : report to Congressional requesters. The Office, 1999.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: DOE is providing independent review of the scientific merit of its research : report to the Committee on Science, House of Representatives. The Office, 2000.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: DOE is providing independent review of the scientific merit of its research : report to the Committee on Science, House of Representatives. The Office, 2000.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Guidance for equipment acquired under grants and cooperative agreements : report to the Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives. The Office, 1999.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Foreign contributions to the Superconducting Super Collider : report to the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives. U.S. General Accounting Office, 1992.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Lessons learned from SEMATECH : report to Congressional requesters. U.S. General Accounting Office, 1992.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Information on fees for selected federally funded research and development centers : fact sheet for the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management and the District of Columbia, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. The Office, 1995.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Interim report on the Small Business Innovation Research Program : report to Congressional committees. The Office, 1995.
Find full textUnited States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs. Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management and the District of Columbia., ed. Federal research: Information on fees for selected federally funded research and development centers : fact sheet for the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management and the District of Columbia, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. The Office, 1995.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Implementation of the Super Collider's cost and schedule control system : report to the Honorable Dale L. Bumpers, U.S. Senate. U.S. General Accounting Office, 1992.
Find full textUnited States. General Accounting Office. RCED., ed. Federal Research: Information on the Advanced Technology Program's award selection. The Office, 1999.
Find full textUnited States. General Accounting Office. RCED., ed. Federal Research: Information on the Advanced Technology Program's award selection. The Office, 1999.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Super collider is over budget and behind schedule : report to Congressional requesters. U.S. General Accounting Office, 1993.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Information on site selection process for DOE's super collider : briefing report to congressional requesters. U.S. General Accounting Office, 1989.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Final site selection process for DOE's super collider : briefing report to the Honorable Dennis DeConcini, U.S. Senate. The Office, 1989.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: Aging federal laboratories need repairs and upgrades : report to the Vice Chairman, Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress. The Office, 1993.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: SEMATECH's efforts to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor industry : report to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives. The Office, 1990.
Find full textOffice, General Accounting. Federal research: System for reimbursing universities' indirect costs should be reevaluated : report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives. The Office, 1992.
Find full textIsmail, Sharif, Alice Farrands, and Steven Wooding. Evaluating Grant Peer Review in the Health Sciences: A review of the literature. RAND Corporation, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.7249/tr742.
Full textLearning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships: Information & application materials : deadline for submissions: April 2, 1999. U.S. Department of Education, Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, 1999.
Find full text(Editor), Mark S. Frankel, and Jane Cave (Editor), eds. Evaluating Science and Scientists: An East-West Dialogue on Research Evaluation in Post-Communist Europe. A Central European University Press Book, 1997.
Find full textGuthrie, Susan, Ioana Ghiga, and Steven Wooding. What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences? An updated review of the literature and six case studies. RAND Corporation, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.7249/rr1822.
Full text(US), National Research Council, and Committee on the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology's Peer Review Program. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. National Academies Press, 1997.
Find full textDogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth. McFarland & Company, Incorporated Publishers, 2012.
Find full textDogmatism in science and medicine: How dominant theories monopolize research and stifle the search for truth. McFarland & Co., 2012.
Find full text