title: Two facets of peer review and the proper role of study sections.
abstract: The current National Institutes of Health study section system is under increasing criticism due to tight budgets and decreased levels of perceived competence. There is also an overemphasis on written critiques from the study section by unsuccessful applicants. It is argued that this arises from confusion between two different purposes of peer review. A system of universal participation in peer review by senior funded investigators is proposed to ameliorate these problems.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy and Biophysics, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, 675 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA. Lenard@umdnj.edu
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Lenard
mesh_terms: D005380:Financing, Government; D006040:Goals; D009316:National Institutes of Health (U.S.) / Q000458:organization & administration; D017712:Peer Review, Research / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D012109:Research Support as Topic; D014481:United States