about
An open investigation of the reproducibility of cancer biology researchNegative results: negative perceptions limit their potential for increasing reproducibilityWhy are sex and gender important to basic physiology and translational and individualized medicine?From Static to Interactive: Transforming Data Visualization to Improve TransparencyShould there be sex-specific criteria for the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure?At the risk of repeating ourselves... Publishing data replication and negative data is good practiceStrategies to Increase Rigor and Reproducibility of Data in Manuscripts: Reply to HérouxMethodological differences account for inconsistencies in reported free VEGF concentrations in pregnant ratsReproducibility of histopathological findings in experimental pathology of the mouse: a sorry tailSystems biology for hepatologists.Restricted scienceIs the decision on the use of biosimilar growth hormone based on high quality scientific evidence? - a systematic review.Peptide Immunoaffinity Enrichment and Targeted Mass Spectrometry Enables Multiplex, Quantitative Pharmacodynamic Studies of Phospho-Signaling.Training to Improve Precision and Accuracy in the Measurement of Fiber Morphology.ASTM international workshop on standards and measurements for tissue engineering scaffolds.Submitting a manuscript for peer review--integrity, integrity, integrityRediscovery rate estimation for assessing the validation of significant findings in high-throughput studies.Cytomegalovirus and glioblastoma; controversies and opportunities.Proteomics in the genome engineering era.DS16570511 is a small-molecule inhibitor of the mitochondrial calcium uniporter.Data visualization, bar naked: A free tool for creating interactive graphics.Are improper kinetic models hampering drug development?The 'harsh and the hassle' of science and the slide to irreproducibility: a concern that must be addressed by investigators and journals.Plasma surfactant protein-D as a diagnostic biomarker for acute respiratory distress syndrome: validation in US and Korean cohorts.The "new realities" of peer review.Translational Research: From Biological Discovery to Public Benefit (or Not)
P2860
Q24273259-1EACEC17-4623-4030-8F7B-C4E4E2884FD8Q27015041-27181DF0-CC56-41DA-988A-86524880955EQ27022386-FF9AAD97-ADED-42FC-B9E1-41ACEC6FA44AQ28600853-A7980BD9-C49C-4100-8783-55952AA2A401Q30442043-51DE4680-06E4-4DDE-BEE0-1920E0FD23A3Q30807719-E0156C9B-C1A0-4152-938A-CA852CFCC9E7Q31133472-E220771F-C85A-42E8-8DED-8B6F6E8DA315Q33701983-07A551A6-3FCC-43FA-83BE-4D6FA0E080B3Q33891443-2E96B99C-E13E-4A3B-9CEE-2ACAC7D990DBQ33927426-2149771C-5C54-4035-9473-F14D74311F96Q34235942-FECE4B64-F7FC-432C-B797-8677A4610587Q35103040-E2058419-D6F0-4E37-A274-542ACB678B64Q35926217-231B9C67-71AE-4FC4-868F-C47D5317BD35Q36210216-7E92AE58-2AFB-494A-A889-015E8291569FQ36950112-560F896E-10E8-4929-9DF6-ECCBEE45761FQ37588792-0C37AD8D-61BA-45FF-A1C9-EA9101C9CAB7Q38254343-6EF42FFE-EC20-4ACE-9BF0-4D7D1C329C04Q38355706-CA5D315B-84B6-4FDA-AF19-4B3B3D009252Q38618624-E56432B1-53A4-4CAE-88A6-0526D1E1BDBAQ41024258-03FE2774-321A-4896-8668-AC6DEEA032DFQ42694800-778F2C32-60BE-48F2-85A5-F4FCF595FCCFQ42971858-F431B51A-1629-48F2-9C89-B1060B5DC8F9Q45893121-22031CB4-AA8F-4436-AA49-A93A65744D67Q47101969-E0C317C4-08C0-4786-8B0E-6230FDACCA27Q48287307-37F0BC37-8454-4A7C-913A-DBBAABE53A0BQ59042590-100946F7-6F63-453B-818B-B580B32F8C11
P2860
description
article publié dans la revue scientifique Nature
@fr
scientific article published in Nature
@en
wetenschappelijk artikel
@nl
наукова стаття, опублікована в Nature в липні 2013
@uk
name
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@en
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@nl
type
label
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@en
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@nl
prefLabel
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@en
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@nl
P356
P1433
P1476
NIH mulls rules for validating key results
@en
P2093
Meredith Wadman
P2888
P356
10.1038/500014A
P407
P577
2013-08-01T00:00:00Z
P6179
1013116759