[Ip-health] NIH peer review changes

[james.love@keionline.org]

http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54733/

TheScientist.com

NIH peer review "review" ends
Posted by Alison McCook
[Entry posted at 6th June 2008 07:36 PM GMT]

The NIH has wrapped up its year-long effort to reform the way it reviews
grant applications, releasing today (June 6) a report that focuses on
changes such as shortening and redesigning applications, making it
easier for good reviewers to serve, and encouraging innovative and
"transformative" projects.

For instance, the agency plans to create a new investigator-initiated
Transformative R01 Award program worth at least $250 million, and invest
at least $750 million in innovative awards, such as the Pioneer, EUREKA,
and New Innovator Awards, for a total of $1 billion over five years.

Additional highlights of the changes include:

-Increasing flexibility for reviewers, and compensating them for their
time and effort

-Focusing applications on impact, including five review criteria, and
changing the rating system for applications

-Establish a minimum of early stage investigators and those new to the
NIH to support, encourage the Transformative Research Pathway

During the last year, the NIH solicited feedback from the life science
community about how it should change peer review, and received 2,000
responses, some in the form of a statement from an institution or
professional organization, each representing thousands of researchers.
In January, I sat down with Lawrence Tabak, director of the National
Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research and co-chair of one of the
NIH peer review working groups, to talk about the process. Click here to
listen to the interview.

And check out the NIH's Web site for more information on how it's
changing peer review.