Cargando…
NIH peer review percentile scores are poorly predictive of grant productivity
Peer review is widely used to assess grant applications so that the highest ranked applications can be funded. A number of studies have questioned the ability of peer review panels to predict the productivity of applications, but a recent analysis of grants funded by the National Institutes of Healt...
Autores principales: | Fang, Ferric C, Bowen, Anthony, Casadevall, Arturo |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4769156/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26880623 http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13323 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Gender inequalities among authors who contributed equally
por: Broderick, Nichole A, et al.
Publicado: (2019) -
An Analysis of Preliminary and Post-Discussion Priority Scores for Grant Applications Peer Reviewed by the Center for Scientific Review at the NIH
por: Martin, Michael R., et al.
Publicado: (2010) -
Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores
por: Lindner, Mark D., et al.
Publicado: (2015) -
The argument for diversifying the NIH grant portfolio
por: Peifer, Mark
Publicado: (2017) -
Correction: Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores
Publicado: (2015)