Reviewing Peer Review at the NIH  

Oleh:

Lauer, Michael S. ; Nakamura, Richard

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: The New England Journal of Medicine (keterangan: ada di Proquest) vol. 373 no. 20 (Nov. 2015), page 1893-1895.

Ketersediaan

Perpustakaan FK Nomor Panggil: N08.K Non-tandon: 1 (dapat dipinjam: 0) Tandon: tidak ada

Lihat Detail Induk

Isi artikel

Since 1946, federal funding of civilian scientists in biomedical research by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has been guided by expert review by scientific peers. NIH science funding, the largest single U.S. government source of such support, has shrunk steadily (as measured in inflation-adjusted dollars) since 2003, which marked the end of a period during which the NIH budget had doubled. The award rate has therefore declined — a problem that's been exacerbated by growth in the number of grant applications submitted (see graphApplications for NIH Research Grants, Grants Awarded, and Success Rates, 1998–2014.). Since review scores are seen as the proximate cause of a research project's failure to obtain support, peer review has come under increasing criticism for its purported weakness in prioritizing the research that will have the most impact.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali