Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The biomedical research enterprise depends on the fair and objective peer review of research grants, leading to the distribution of resources through efficient and robust competitive methods. In the United States, federal funding agencies and foundations collectively distribute billions of dollars a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Circulation research 2017-08, Vol.121 (4), p.e9-e19
Main Authors: Liaw, Lucy, Freedman, Jane E., Becker, Lance B., Mehta, Nehal N., Liscum, Laura
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
American Heart Association
Biomedical research
Biomedical Research - economics
Biomedical Research - methods
Biomedical Research - standards
Heart
Humans
Peer review
Peer Review - methods
Peer Review - standards
Research Support as Topic - economics
Research Support as Topic - methods
Research Support as Topic - standards
Reviews
United States
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The biomedical research enterprise depends on the fair and objective peer review of research grants, leading to the distribution of resources through efficient and robust competitive methods. In the United States, federal funding agencies and foundations collectively distribute billions of dollars annually to support biomedical research. For the American Heart Association, a Peer Review Subcommittee is charged with establishing the highest standards for peer review. This scientific statement reviews the current literature on peer review practices, describes the current American Heart Association peer review process and those of other agencies, analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of American Heart Association peer review practices, and recommends best practices for the future.
ISSN:0009-7330
1524-4571
DOI:10.1161/RES.0000000000000158