[Research proposals submitted to the Dutch Investigative Medicine Fund; evaluation of the scientific quality by the Council for Scientific Research (NWO)].
The Council for Medical and Health Research (MW-NWO) assessed the scientific quality of research proposals submitted to the Dutch Investigative Medicine Fund, and analysed if there had been changes over time in the proportion of proposals which the MW-NWO advised to reject, the role of reports of external reviewers and the most important methodological flaws. In the period 1995-1999 'reject' had been advised for an average of 50% of the proposals, with a tendency to a smaller proportion in recent years. In nearly half of the proposals the judgements of external reviewers were not in agreement with each other. There was only a weak correlation between the judgements of the reviewers and the final advice of NWO. Among the most important flaws mentioned in the NWO advice were: efficacy not proven (a prerequisite for the Fund), proposed study not needed to solve the policy problem and methodological flaws, e.g. design and power calculation not adequate, deficiencies of inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Hoeksema
H L
HL
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), gebied Medische Wetenschappen (MW), Postbus 93.138, 2509 AC Den Haag. hoeksema@nwo.nl
Klasen
E C
EC
D005582:Foundations / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D009426:Netherlands; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards / Q000639:trends*; D012109:Research Support as Topic / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards* / Q000639:trends; D012189:Retrospective Studies
Aanvragen Ontwikkelingsgeneeskunde: de beoordeling van de wetenschappelijke kwaliteit door de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO).