Surveys of current status in biomedical science grant review: Funding organisations' and grant reviewers' perspectives

BMC Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue , 2010, Pages

  Schroter, Sara ^a   Groves, Trish ^a   Højgaard, Liselotte ^b,c  

^a BMA House ^*  (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c ESSC ESF   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ADVISEMENT; ARTICLE; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FUNDING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ONLINE SYSTEM; ORGANIZATIONAL EFFICIENCY; PEER REVIEW ORGANIZATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RANDOM SAMPLE; ECONOMICS; ETHICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PEER REVIEW; WORKLOAD;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; FINANCING, ORGANIZED; INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; WORKLOAD;

EID: 77958021486     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17417015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-62     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Jefferson T, Godlee F, . (Eds) Peer Review in Health Sciences 2003, London: BMJ Books, 2, (Eds).
2. Nationa Institutes for Health Enhancing peer review at NIH. Nationa Institutes for Health., http://enhancing-peer-review.nih.gov/index.html
3. European Medical Research Councils Present Status and Future Strategy for Medical Research in Europe 2007, Strasbourg, France: European Science Foundation, European Medical Research Councils.
4. Jefferson T, Rudin M, Brodney Folse S, Davidoff F. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 18:MR000016.
5. Anonymous Guarding the guardians: research on editorial peer review: selected proceedings from the first international congress on peer review in biomedical publication. JAMA 1990, 263:1317-1441. 10.1001/jama.263.10.1317, 2304208, Anonymous.
6. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors., http://www.ICMJE.org
7. Demicheli V, Di Pietrantonj C. Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 18:MR000003.
8. National Institutes of Health 2007-2008 peer review self-study final draft. National Institutes of Health., http://enhancing-peer-review.nih.gov/meetings/nihpeerreviewreportfinaldraft.pdf
9. Tite L, Schroter S. Why do reviewers decline to review for journals? A survey. J Epidemiol Comm Health 2007, 61:9-12.
10. Godlee F. Making reviewers visible: openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA 2002, 287:2762-2765. 10.1001/jama.287.21.2762, 12038905.