NIH peer review percentile scores are poorly predictive of grant productivity
Peer review is widely used to assess grant applications so that the highest ranked applications can be funded. A number of studies have questioned the ability of peer review panels to predict the productivity of applications, but a recent analysis of grants funded by the National Institutes of Healt...
Main Authors: | Ferric C Fang, Anthony Bowen, Arturo Casadevall |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
eLife Sciences Publications Ltd
2016-02-01
|
Series: | eLife |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://elifesciences.org/articles/13323 |
Similar Items
-
‘Are you siding with a personality or the grant proposal?’: observations on how peer review panels function
by: John Coveney, et al.
Published: (2017-12-01) -
Three years of quality assurance data assessing the performance of over 4000 grant peer review contributions to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Project Grant Competition
by: Clare L. Ardern, et al.
Published: (2023-01-01) -
Gender differences in peer reviewed grant applications, awards, and amounts: a systematic review and meta-analysis
by: Karen B. Schmaling, et al.
Published: (2023-05-01) -
Industry Collaborations of Research Teams: Are They Penalized or Rewarded in the Grant Evaluation Process?
by: Sıla Öcalan-Özel, et al.
Published: (2021-10-01) -
External Tests of Peer Review Validity Via Impact Measures
by: Stephen A. Gallo, et al.
Published: (2018-08-01)