PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10727958

Getting funded.

Abstract

Getting funded is still possible for cardiothoracic surgeons. You must have a clear hypothesis, have an organized approach, and develop excellent preliminary data. Most important, you need to apply to get funded.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

I L Kron. 2000. Getting funded.. https://doi.org/10.1067/mtc.2000.104722

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Why I started the Thyroid Cancer Foundation.

[Our original introduction to "Listen to the Patient" is published again to emphasize the Journal's commitment to this important series.] For more than 50 years, Cancer has been devoted to exploring every facet of malignant neoplasia, from morphology to therapy, from epidemiology to biology, from historical perspective to basic science. One aspect, however, needs emphasis, namely, the human being who bears the burden of the cancer. For this reason and with the encouragement of the Editor, we have undertaken to remedy this situation by directing attention to the fears and frustrations, hopes and expectations, and feelings and thoughts of all kinds of the person who has cancer, who is worried about it, and who is dependent on physicians specialized in its diagnosis and management. For doctors to be understanding of the very deep needs of patients with cancer, it is requisite that they be privy to authentic, but often unspoken, expressions of a patient's anxieties about physical and emotional pain, loss of control over personal destiny, and plain dread of dying and of the end of cherished relationships. The essay that follows was written by a woman diagnosed with cancer who felt herself alone and in need of talking with others who faced the same diagnosis. Barrie R. Cassileth, Ph.D. Integrative Medicine Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York A. Bernard Ackerman, M.D. Ackerman Academy of Dermatopathology, New York, New York.

Foundations↗

[Research proposals submitted to the Dutch Investigative Medicine Fund; evaluation of the scientific quality by the Council for Scientific Research (NWO)].

The Council for Medical and Health Research (MW-NWO) assessed the scientific quality of research proposals submitted to the Dutch Investigative Medicine Fund, and analysed if there had been changes over time in the proportion of proposals which the MW-NWO advised to reject, the role of reports of external reviewers and the most important methodological flaws. In the period 1995-1999 'reject' had been advised for an average of 50% of the proposals, with a tendency to a smaller proportion in recent years. In nearly half of the proposals the judgements of external reviewers were not in agreement with each other. There was only a weak correlation between the judgements of the reviewers and the final advice of NWO. Among the most important flaws mentioned in the NWO advice were: efficacy not proven (a prerequisite for the Fund), proposed study not needed to solve the policy problem and methodological flaws, e.g. design and power calculation not adequate, deficiencies of inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Foundations↗