Navigation Links
Study explores effects of review setting on scientific peer review
Date:8/7/2013

RESTON, VIRGINIA Research findings published today in PLOS ONE report that the setting in which a scientific peer review panel evaluates grant applications does not necessarily impact the outcome of the review process. However, the research found that the average amount of discussion panelists engage in during the review is reduced. The investigation examined more than 1,600 grant application reviews coordinated by the American Institute of Biological Sciences Scientific Peer Advisory and Review Services (AIBS SPARS) on behalf of a federal agency over a four-year period.

The researchers compared two years when grant applications were reviewed using an in-person peer review panel to two years when panels were conducted via teleconference or videoconference.

Funding organizations routinely bring experts together to review research grant applications. A process known as scientific peer review, the goal of these panels is to identify the best research applications.

"There are no studies exploring whether the review setting significantly alters the quality of the peer review process," stated Dr. Stephen Gallo, the lead author of this study and Technical Operations Manager for AIBS SPARS.

"Our goal is always a reliable and high-quality peer-review process. It is important that we understand the strengths and weaknesses of different peer review methods," said Scott Glisson, Director of AIBS SPARS and an author of this study.

The findings appear in "Teleconference Versus Face-To-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Applications: Effects on Review Outcomes" published in PLOS ONE.

"Little difference was found in most of the review metrics between face-to-face and teleconference settings," said Gallo. Application scoring was only modestly affected and reviewers used the full scoring range regardless of review setting. The reviewer ratings were highly reliable in both settings.

Often, the greatest anticipated difference between in-person and teleconference panels is the amount of time allocated to discussing applications. This study found teleconference or videoconference panels allocated less time to application discussions than in-person panels.

"This is a first of its kind study that provides valuable data to help research program managers select appropriate models for conducting peer review," said Glisson.

More research is needed. "We should know whether the reduced amount of discussion and peripheral interactions that occur in a teleconference setting influence the final panel outcomes, and, ultimately the productivity of the research that is funded," said Gallo.


'/>"/>

Contact: Robert Gropp
rgropp@aibs.org
202-628-1500 x250
American Institute of Biological Sciences
Source:Eurekalert

Related biology news :

1. Women in urban areas show high rates of postpartum depression, study finds
2. Study questions natures ability to self-correct climate change
3. UCSB study finds climate change is causing modifications to marine life behavior
4. Study reveals potential role of love hormone oxytocin in brain function
5. Mount Sinai researchers develop first successful laboratory model for studying hepatitis C
6. Study finds physicians need to better recognize use of herbal supplements while breastfeeding
7. Study highlights possible new approach to prostate cancer treatment
8. Breath analysis reliably indicates presence, level of infection in mice, UCI study finds
9. Southerners are less trusting, but trust is a factor in environmental cooperation, study shows
10. Study investigates extraordinary trout with tolerance to heavily polluted water
11. Extinct ancient ape did not walk like a human, study shows
Post Your Comments:
*Name:
*Comment:
*Email:
(Date:3/14/2016)... Allemagne, March 14, 2016 ... - --> - Renvoi : image disponible ... --> --> DERMALOG, ... fournit de nouveaux lecteurs d,empreintes digitales pour l,enregistrement ... DERMALOG sera utilisé pour produire des cartes d,identité ...
(Date:3/9/2016)... March 9, 2016 This BCC Research report ... of the RNA Sequencing (RNA Seq) market for the ... instruments, tools and reagents, data analysis, and services. ... of the RNA-Sequencing market such as RNA-Sequencing tools and ... main factors affecting each segment and forecast their market ...
(Date:3/3/2016)... 2016  2016FLEX, organized by FlexTech, a SEMI ... in flexible, hybrid and printed electronics. More than ... have gathered for short courses, technical session, exhibits, ... The Flex Conference celebrates its 15 th ... organizations, and universities contributing to the adoption of ...
Breaking Biology News(10 mins):
(Date:5/5/2016)... ... May 05, 2016 , ... American ... two additional patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 9,322,133 and 9,322,134, to API and its ... nanocellulose as well as hydrophobic nanocellulose compositions. In addition to these patents ...
(Date:5/4/2016)... ... May 04, 2016 , ... Proove Biosciences, Inc. , the commercial ... with McGill University . The partnership is designed to advance research in pain ... help patients in pain. With the new agreement, researchers at Proove Biosciences are able ...
(Date:5/4/2016)... (PRWEB) , ... May 04, 2016 , ... ... recent innovations in biotechnology to help treat hormonal and stress related hair loss. ... has captured the hearts of key opinion leaders in the medical and salon ...
(Date:5/3/2016)... ... 03, 2016 , ... Flagship Biosciences, the leader in ... Board of Directors. Dr. Gillett recently retired from Charles River Laboratories (CRL), where, ... Scientific Officer. A board-certified veterinary pathologist, Dr. Gillett joined Charles River in 1999 ...
Breaking Biology Technology: