title: NIH Peer Review: Scored Review Criteria and Overall Impact.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
authors.forename: Mark D
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Lindner
authors.affiliation: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
authors.forename: Adrian
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Vancea
authors.affiliation: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
authors.forename: Mei-Ching
authors.initials: MC
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.affiliation: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA; Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Research and Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign 61820.
authors.forename: George
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Chacko
keywords: National Institutes of Health; R01; peer review; scored review criteria