NIH Peer Review: Scored Review Criteria and Overall Impact
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
NIH Peer Review
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 ...
متن کاملHow Criterion Scores Predict the Overall Impact Score and Funding Outcomes for National Institutes of Health Peer-Reviewed Applications
Understanding the factors associated with successful funding outcomes of research project grant (R01) applications is critical for the biomedical research community. R01 applications are evaluated through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) peer review system, where peer reviewers are asked to evaluate and assign scores to five research criteria when assessing an application's scientific an...
متن کامل'Your comments are meaner than your score': score calibration talk influences intra- and inter-panel variability during scientific grant peer review.
In scientific grant peer review, groups of expert scientists meet to engage in the collaborative decision-making task of evaluating and scoring grant applications. Prior research on grant peer review has established that inter-reviewer reliability is typically poor. In the current study, experienced reviewers for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were recruited to participate in one of fo...
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 کاملFactors Involved in Missed Nursing Care: A Systematic Review
Background. Missed Nursing Care (MNC) is experienced in nearly all health care facilities. Awareness of the aspects involved in the occurrence of MNC can lead to the improvement of the quality of patient care. This systematic review aims to answer the question: "What factors are involved in the incidence of missed nursing care?" Methods. This systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting...
متن کامل