Libros sobre el tema "Peer review of research grant proposals"
Crea una cita precisa en los estilos APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard y otros
Consulte los 33 mejores mejores libros para su investigación sobre el tema "Peer review of research grant proposals".
Junto a cada fuente en la lista de referencias hay un botón "Agregar a la bibliografía". Pulsa este botón, y generaremos automáticamente la referencia bibliográfica para la obra elegida en el estilo de cita que necesites: APA, MLA, Harvard, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.
También puede descargar el texto completo de la publicación académica en formato pdf y leer en línea su resumen siempre que esté disponible en los metadatos.
Explore libros sobre una amplia variedad de disciplinas y organice su bibliografía correctamente.
National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Peer Review Procedures. Improving research through peer review. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 1987.
Buscar texto completoNational Cancer Institute (U.S.), ed. Share your expertise with us. [Bethesda Md.]: National Cancer Insitute, 2001.
Buscar texto completoCenter for Scientific Review (National Institutes of Health). What happens to your grant application: A primer for new applicants. 8a ed. Bethesda, Md.]: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 2011.
Buscar texto completoUnited 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. Washington, D.C: The Office, 1994.
Buscar texto completoLangfeldt, Liv. Fagfellevurdering som forskningspolitisk virkemiddel: En studie av fordelingen av frie midler i Norges forskningsråd. Oslo: NIFU, Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning, 1998.
Buscar texto completoRichard, Mandel. A half century of peer review, 1946-1996. Bethesda, MD (2760 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria 22314): Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, 1996.
Buscar texto completoHill, Anne. Addressing common problems: Guidance for submitting European Commission fifth framework proposals. Birmingham: Outreach Press, 2001.
Buscar texto completoCenter, Horace Mann Learning, ed. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. [Washington, D.C.?]: Horace Mann Learning Center, 1988.
Buscar texto completoCenter, Horace Mann Learning. Reviewing applications for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements: A workbook for application reviewers. Washington, D.C.?]: Horace Mann Learning Center, U.S. Department of Education, 1991.
Buscar texto completoS, Frankel Mark y Cave Jane, eds. Evaluating science and scientists: An east-west dialogue on research evaluation in post-communist Europe. Budapest: Central European University Press, 1997.
Buscar texto completoShestopal, A. V. y V. I. Konnov. Sot︠s︡ialʹno-politicheskai︠a︡ funkt︠s︡ii︠a︡ nat︠s︡ionalʹnykh nauchnykh fondov: Sbornik nauchnykh stateĭ. Moskva: Izdatelʹstvo "MGIMO-Universitet", 2016.
Buscar texto completo1956-, Evans Martyn, ed. A decent proposal: Ethical review of clinical research. New York, N.Y: Wiley, 1996.
Buscar texto completoD, Muraskin Lana, United States. National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board y Educational Resources Information Center (U.S.), eds. Strengthening the standards: Recommendations for OERI peer review : summary report, draft January 30, 1999. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Dept. of Education, National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board, 1999.
Buscar texto completoBadji, Toure Lalla y African Development Foundation, eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. Washington, D.C. (1400 Eye St., N.W., 10th floor, Washington 20005): African Development Foundation, 1995.
Buscar texto completoD, Muraskin Lana, August and Associates y 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. Washington, DC (80 F St., NW, Washington 20208-7564): The Board, 1999.
Buscar texto completoBadji, Toure Lalla y African Development Foundation (U.S.), eds. Mobilizing the grassroots for community health: An ADF research reader. Washington, D.C. (1400 Eye St., N.W., 10th floor, Washington 20005): African Development Foundation, 1995.
Buscar texto completoNational 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. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 1997.
Buscar texto completoNational Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. [Bethesda, Md.]: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institites of Health, 1987.
Buscar texto completoNational Institutes of Health (U.S.), ed. NIH peer review of research grant applications. [Bethesda, Md.]: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 1988.
Buscar texto completoOffice, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. Washington, D.C: The Office, 1992.
Buscar texto completoOffice, General Accounting. Department of Education grant award. Washington, D.C: The Office, 1992.
Buscar texto completoShare your expertise with us. [Bethesda, Md.]: National Cancer Institute, 2002.
Buscar texto completo(Editor), Mark S. Frankel y 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.
Buscar texto completoLearning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships: Information & application materials : deadline for submissions: April 2, 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, 1999.
Buscar texto completoFinal report. Washington, D.C: National Science Foundation, 1986.
Buscar texto completoDogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth. McFarland & Company, Incorporated Publishers, 2012.
Buscar texto completoDogmatism in science and medicine: How dominant theories monopolize research and stifle the search for truth. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland & Co., 2012.
Buscar texto completo(US), National Research Council y 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.
Buscar texto completoPeach, Ken. Reviewing Research, Making Proposals and Evaluating Science. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796077.003.0011.
Texto completoSpyns, Peter y Maria-Esther Vidal. Научное рецензирование. Лучшие практики и рекомендации. Editado por Elena Tikhonova y Olga Kirillova. Eco-Vector, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/spr202101.
Texto completoCho, Jeasik. Evaluating Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199330010.001.0001.
Texto completoBoyer-Kassem, Thomas, Conor Mayo-Wilson y Michael Weisberg, eds. Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190680534.001.0001.
Texto completoMartinho Belchior, Alirio, Carlos Mascarenhas, Maha Othman, Marília Rua, Mari Takashima, Marta Silva, Laila Albalushi et al. iNURSING JOURNAL - Manual for Authors: The step-by-step instructions guide. International Nursing School Ltd., 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.52457/qprz4666.
Texto completo