NIH Peer Review
نویسندگان
چکیده
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. Funding decisions are made largely based on the outcome of a peer review process that is intended to provide a fair, equitable, timely, and unbiased review of the quality, scientific merit, and potential impact of the research. There have been concerns about the criteria reviewers are using, and recent changes in review procedures at the NIH now make it possible to conduct an analysis of how reviewers evaluate applications for funding. This study examined the criteria and overall impact scores recorded by assigned reviewers for R01 grant applications. The results suggest that all the scored review criteria, including innovation, are related to the overall impact score. Further, good scores are necessary on all five scored review criteria, not just the score for research methodology, in order to achieve a good overall impact score.
منابع مشابه
Enhancing NIH Grant Peer Review: A Broader Perspective
Over the next couple of years, NIH will be revising its process of reviewing grant applications. The planned changes will make the NIH system more similar in some ways to those of European funding agencies, while retaining many unique features.
متن کاملExamining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores
The predictive validity of peer review at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has not yet been demonstrated empirically. It might be assumed that the most efficient and expedient test of the predictive validity of NIH peer review would be an examination of the correlation between percentile scores from peer review and bibliometric indices of the publications produced from funded projects. T...
متن کاملSample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Review
The Working Group on Peer Review of the Advisory Committee to the Director of NIH has recommended that at least 4 reviewers should be used to assess each grant application. A sample size analysis of the number of reviewers needed to evaluate grant applications reveals that a substantially larger number of evaluators are required to provide the level of precision that is currently mandated. NIH ...
متن کاملPeer review at NIH: a conversation with CSR director Toni Scarpa.
65 The stated objective of NIH’s efforts to enhance peer review is to “Fund the best science, by the best scientists, with the least amount of administrative burden.” In 2007 NIH began a formal review of its peer review system. This led to the development of a number of new policies and procedures, including the introduction in January 2010 of a shortened and restructured grant application. The...
متن کاملPeering into review
Funds awarded after peer review of grant applications by committees established by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) directly affects the careers of many biomedical scientists. The scientific tastes and judgments of peer review committees also shape fields by favoring specific questions and approaches to particular scientific opportunities that the committees favor. Such a process natural...
متن کاملAmerican Idol and NIH Grant Review
Peer review is an essential part of identifying scientific projects worthy of NIH funding. An Analysis article in the June 2, 2006 issue of Cell (Bonetta, 2006) highlighted the fact that six years after the reorganization of the NIH integrated review groups, further streamlining of NIH grant peer review is still needed. The NIH is well aware of the problems related to the peer review process, a...
متن کامل