Reviewer rewards from the NIH

In an effort to keep good peer reviewers coming back, the National Institutes of Health is letting "permanent" reviewers, who typically serve for four years on chartered study sections, submit their own R01, R21, and R34 grant applications at any time, disregarding standard deadlines. NIH spokesman Don Luckett told me the agency decided to adopt the change after receiving feedback from long-term reviewers that their service put them at a disadvantage by requiring them to review applications whi

By | January 4, 2008

In an effort to keep good peer reviewers coming back, the National Institutes of Health is letting "permanent" reviewers, who typically serve for four years on chartered study sections, submit their own R01, R21, and R34 grant applications at any time, disregarding standard deadlines. NIH spokesman Don Luckett told me the agency decided to adopt the change after receiving feedback from long-term reviewers that their service put them at a disadvantage by requiring them to review applications while preparing their own. Doing away with deadlines for these reviewers "is a big advantage," he said, "and we're hoping it will be an incentive for reviewers to sign up" to review applications. Luckett said that applications submitted outside of standard deadlines would be reviewed within 120 days of submission, the same approximate turnaround time as applications submitted by deadline. The NIH currently has approximately 4,000 reviewers who would qualify for this extended deadline. The NIH is in the midst of an in-depth look at ways to improve the peer review process. Click linkurl:here;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/54009/ to weigh in on some of the ideas the agency is considering. You can read more about the change in policy linkurl:here;http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-026.html on the NIH's Web site.

Popular Now

  1. How Plants Evolved Different Ways to Make Caffeine
  2. Thomson Reuters Predicts Nobelists
    The Nutshell Thomson Reuters Predicts Nobelists

    According to citation statistics, researchers behind programmed cell death pathways and CRISPR/Cas9 are among those in line for Nobel Prizes this year.

  3. Sequencing Reveals Genomic Diversity of the Human Brain
  4. Reviewing Results-Free Manuscripts
    The Nutshell Reviewing Results-Free Manuscripts

    An open-access journal is trialing a peer-review process in which reviewers do not have access to the results or discussion sections of submitted papers.

RayBiotech