<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Peer review: the neverending story</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bytesizebio.net/index.php/2010/04/13/peer-review-the-neverending-story/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bytesizebio.net/index.php/2010/04/13/peer-review-the-neverending-story/</link>
	<description>The musings and ravings of a computational biologist about science, computers, music and, you know, stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 18:13:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: cement_head</title>
		<link>http://bytesizebio.net/index.php/2010/04/13/peer-review-the-neverending-story/comment-page-1/#comment-741</link>
		<dc:creator>cement_head</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bytesizebio.net/?p=3481#comment-741</guid>
		<description>I think a better study would be focussed on how peer review works in terms of Grants and Funding.  In other words, when there&#039;s real money involved; I think the results of linking reviewers to grant applicants would be different.  Just my two cents (not awarded yet!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think a better study would be focussed on how peer review works in terms of Grants and Funding.  In other words, when there&#8217;s real money involved; I think the results of linking reviewers to grant applicants would be different.  Just my two cents (not awarded yet!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

