bioRxivScientific Communication & Education
Characterization of the Peer Review Network at the Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health
Abstract
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. This funding is largely effected through a competitive grants process. Each year the Center for Scientific Review (CSR) at NIH manages the evaluation, by peer review, of more than 55,000 grant applications. A relevant management question is how this scientific evaluation system, supported by finite resources, could be continuously evaluated and improved for maximal benefit to the scientific community and the taxpaying public. Towards this purpose, we have created the first system-level description of peer review at CSR by applying text analysis, bibliometric, and graph visualization techniques to administrative records. We identify otherwise latent relationships across scientific clusters, which in turn suggest opportunities for structural reorganization of the system based on expert evaluation. Such studies support the creation of monitoring tools and provide transparency and knowledge to stakeholders.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- High cost of bias: Diminishing marginal returns on NIH grant funding to institutions
Wayne P. Wahls·bioRxiv·Jul 13, 2018
- Retractions and rewards in science: An open question for reviewers and funders
M. D. Ribeiro, M. Kalichman, S. M. Vasconcelos·bioRxiv·May 31, 2022
- Participation and Motivations of Grant Peer Reviewers: A Comprehensive Survey of the Biomedical Research Community
S. A. Gallo, L. A. Thompson, … S. R. Glisson·bioRxiv·Jun 4, 2019
- Community review: a robust and scalable selection system for resource allocation within open science and innovation communities
C. L. B. Graham, T. E. Landrain, … M. Santolini·bioRxiv·Apr 25, 2022
- Can paid reviews promote scientific quality and offer novel career perspectives for young scientists?
Christian Wurzbacher, Hans-Peter Grossart, … Martin Unterseher·bioRxiv·Nov 25, 2016
- Marginal Returns And Levels Of Research Grant Support Among Scientists Supported By The National Institutes Of Health
Michael Lauer, Deepshikha Roychowdhury, … Katrina Pearson·bioRxiv·May 29, 2017