Seeking Your Input on Simplifying Review Criteria

Bruce Reed, Ph.D., Deputy Director of the NIH Center for Scientific Review Guest post by Bruce Reed, Deputy Director of the NIH Center for Scientific Review, originally released on the Review Matters blog Over the past several years we have heard consistent concerns about the complexity of review criteria and administrative load of peer review. CSR shares the concern that the current set of standards has the unintended consequence of dividing reviewer attention among too many questions, thus reducing focus on scientific merit and increasing reviewer burden. Each element was intended make review better, but we worry that the cumulative whole may in fact distract from the main goal of review — to get input from experts on the scientific and technical merit of the proposed work. To address these concerns, CSR has convened a working group of our advisory council, charged with recommending changes to research project grant review criteria that will improve review outcomes and reduce reviewer burden. The group is co-chaired by Tonya Palermo and me, and includes some of our council members, other members of the scientific community, and the NIH Review Policy Officer from the Office of Extramural Research. We would like to hear your thoughts on the issue. How might review criteria be modified to obtain the best evaluations of scientific merit? You can provide feedback directly to me at bruce.reed@nih.gov, to feedback@csr.nih.gov, or to any member of...
Source: NIH Extramural Nexus - Category: Research Authors: Tags: blog Open Mike CSR Peer review Source Type: funding