The latest issue of Academic Medicine features a commentary by Leslie Costello called “Is NIH Funding the ‘Best Science by the Best Scientists?‘” In it, she contends that changes to the NIH review process of R01 grants have introduced elements that undermine the central mission to reward the most worthy proposals.
Deciding what constitutes the “best science” will always require subjective judgment. On a recent round of grants that I reviewed, I was curious to see the comments of my fellow peer reviewers. Applications that I had graded with the lowest score others had given the highest score. It was rare to find the grant that all three reviewers marked with the same score.
Subjective though it may be, grant reviewing does tend to identify the applicants who have thought most carefully about their proposed projects. Those scientists will be the most effective stewards of the money the committee awards.
Tags: Grants
inspiron 1750 batteryI heard that there is Michelangelo’s frescoes and Raphael studio
Very interesting topic , thanks for putting up. “I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world.” by Socrates.
I just could not go away your website prior to suggesting that I actually enjoyed the standard information an individual supply to your guests? Is going to be again steadily in order to inspect new posts.
I need to many thanks to the efforts you’ve got created in composing this informative article. I am hoping the identical ideal publish from you from the upcoming also. In fact your creative creating talents has inspired me to begin my personal blog site now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your publish up is really a fine model of it.
electronic cigarette starter kit with usb
This blog site has got a lot of very helpful stuff on it. Thanks for sharing it with me.