Literature DB >> 18663221

Statistical analysis of the National Institutes of Health peer review system.

Valen E Johnson1.   

Abstract

A statistical model is proposed for the analysis of peer-review ratings of R01 grant applications submitted to the National Institutes of Health. Innovations of this model include parameters that reflect differences in reviewer scoring patterns, a mechanism to account for the transfer of information from an application's preliminary ratings and group discussion to final ratings provided by all panel members and posterior estimates of the uncertainty associated with proposal ratings. Application of this model to recent R01 rating data suggests that statistical adjustments to panel rating data would lead to a 25% change in the pool of funded proposals. Viewed more broadly, the methodology proposed in this article provides a general framework for the analysis of data collected interactively from expert panels through the use of the Delphi method and related procedures.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18663221      PMCID: PMC2488382          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0804538105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  2 in total

1.  Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences.

Authors:  Kenneth A Bollen
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 24.137

2.  The theoretical status of latent variables.

Authors:  Denny Borsboom; Gideon J Mellenbergh; Jaap van Heerden
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 8.934

  2 in total
  19 in total

1.  NIH peer review reform--change we need, or lipstick on a pig?

Authors:  Ferric C Fang; Arturo Casadevall
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 3.441

2.  From funding agencies to scientific agency: Collective allocation of science funding as an alternative to peer review.

Authors:  Johan Bollen; David Crandall; Damion Junk; Ying Ding; Katy Börner
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 8.807

3.  An efficient system to fund science: from proposal review to peer-to-peer distributions.

Authors:  Johan Bollen; David Crandall; Damion Junk; Ying Ding; Katy Börner
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2016-09-03       Impact factor: 3.238

4.  Peer review versus editorial review and their role in innovative science.

Authors:  Georg Steinhauser; Wolfram Adlassnig; Jesaka Ahau Risch; Serena Anderlini; Petros Arguriou; Aaron Zolen Armendariz; William Bains; Clark Baker; Martin Barnes; Jonathan Barnett; Michael Baumgartner; Thomas Baumgartner; Charles A Bendall; Yvonne S Bender; Max Bichler; Teresa Biermann; Ronaldo Bini; Eduardo Blanco; John Bleau; Anthony Brink; Darin Brown; Christopher Burghuber; Roy Calne; Brian Carter; Cesar Castaño; Peter Celec; Maria Eugenia Celis; Nicky Clarke; David Cockrell; David Collins; Brian Coogan; Jennifer Craig; Cal Crilly; David Crowe; Antonei B Csoka; Chaza Darwich; Topiciprin Del Kebos; Michele Derinaldi; Bongani Dlamini; Tomasz Drewa; Michael Dwyer; Fabienne Eder; Raúl Ehrichs de Palma; Dean Esmay; Catherine Evans Rött; Christopher Exley; Robin Falkov; Celia Ingrid Farber; William Fearn; Sophie Felsmann; Jarl Flensmark; Andrew K Fletcher; Michaela Foster; Kostas N Fountoulakis; Jim Fouratt; Jesus Garcia Blanca; Manuel Garrido Sotelo; Florian Gittler; Georg Gittler; Juan Gomez; Juan F Gomez; Maria Grazia Gonzales Polar; Jossina Gonzalez; Christoph Gösselsberger; Lynn Habermacher; Michael Hajek; Faith Hakala; Mary-Sue Haliburton; John Robert Hankins; Jason Hart; Sepp Hasslberger; Donalyn Hennessey; Andrea Herrmann; Mike Hersee; Connie Howard; Suzanne Humphries; Laeeth Isharc; Petar Ivanovski; Stephen Jenuth; Jens Jerndal; Christine Johnson; Yonas Keleta; Anna Kenny; Billie Kidd; Fritz Kohle; Jafar Kolahi; Marianne Koller-Peroutka; Lyubov Kostova; Arunachalam Kumar; Alejandro Kurosawa; Tony Lance; Michael Lechermann; Bernhard Lendl; Michael Leuchters; Evan Lewis; Edward Lieb; Gloria Lloyd; Angelika Losek; Yao Lu; Saadia Maestracci; Dennis Mangan; Alberto W Mares; Juan Mazar Barnett; Valerie McClain; John Sydney McNair; Terry Michael; Lloyd Miller; Partizia Monzani; Belen Moran; Mike Morris; Georg Mößmer; Johny Mountain; Onnie Mary Moyo Phuthe; Marcos Muñoz; Sheri Nakken; Anne Nduta Wambui; Bettina Neunteufl; Dimitrije Nikolić; Devesh V Oberoi; Gregory Obmode; Laura Ogar; Jo Ohara; Naion Olej Rybine; Bryan Owen; Kim Wilson Owen; Rakesh Parikh; Nicholas J G Pearce; Bernhard Pemmer; Chris Piper; Ian Prince; Terence Reid; Heiner Rindermann; Stefan Risch; Josh Robbins; Seth Roberts; Ajeandro Romero; Michael Thaddäus Rothe; Sergio Ruiz; Juliane Sacher; Wolfgang Sackl; Markus Salletmaier; Jairaj Sanand; Clemens Sauerzopf; Thomas Schwarzgruber; David Scott; Laura Seegers; David Seppi; Kyle Shields; Jolanta Siller-Matula; Beldeu Singh; Sibusio Sithole; Florian Six; John R Skoyles; Jildou Slofstra; Daphne Anne Sole; Werner F Sommer; Mels Sonko; Chrislie J Starr-Casanova; Marjorie Elizabeth Steakley; Wolfgang Steinhauser; Konstantin Steinhoff; Johannes H Sterba; Martin Steppan; Reinhard Stindl; Joe Stokely; Karri Stokely; Gilles St-Pierre; James Stratford; Christina Streli; Carl Stryg; Mike Sullivan; Johann Summhammer; Amhayes Tadesse; David Tavares; Laura Thompson; Alison Tomlinson; Jack Tozer; Siro I Trevisanato; Michaela Trimmel; Nicole Turner; Paul Vahur; Jennie van der Byl; Tine van der Maas; Leo Varela; Carlos A Vega; Shiloh Vermaak; Alex Villasenor; Matt Vogel; Georg von Wintzigerode; Christoph Wagner; Manuel Weinberger; Peter Weinberger; Nick Wilson; Jennifer Finocchio Wolfe; Michael A Woodley; Ian Young; Glenn Zuraw; Nicole Zwiren
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2012-10

5.  A quantitative linguistic analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 application critiques from investigators at one institution.

Authors:  Anna Kaatz; Wairimu Magua; David R Zimmerman; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  The importance of organizational justice in ensuring research integrity.

Authors:  Brian C Martinson; A Lauren Crain; Raymond De Vries; Melissa S Anderson
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.742

7.  The calculus of committee composition.

Authors:  Eric Libby; Leon Glass
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Collaborative models for translational neuroscience and rehabilitation research.

Authors:  Bruce H Dobkin
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 3.919

9.  An analysis of preliminary and post-discussion priority scores for grant applications peer reviewed by the Center for Scientific Review at the NIH.

Authors:  Michael R Martin; Andrea Kopstein; Joy M Janice
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Funding grant proposals for scientific research: retrospective analysis of scores by members of grant review panel.

Authors:  Nicholas Graves; Adrian G Barnett; Philip Clarke
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.