Journal article

Usingsimplified peer review processes to fund research: A prospective study

DL Herbert, N Graves, P Clarke, AG Barnett

BMJ Open | Published : 2015

Abstract

Objective: To prospectively test two simplified peer review processes, estimate the agreement between the simplified and official processes, and compare the costs of peer review. Design, participants and setting: A prospective parallel study of Project Grant proposals submitted in 2013 to the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. The official funding outcomes were compared with two simplified processes using proposals in Public Health and Basic Science. The two simplified processes were: panels of 7 reviewers who met face-to-face and reviewed only the nine-page research proposal and track record (simplified panel); and 2 reviewers who independently reviewed only ..

View full abstract

University of Melbourne Researchers