Title: SRG MEMBER REVIEW
1SRG MEMBER REVIEW
2ASSUMPTIONS
- Reviewers are the engine that drives the peer
review system - Reviewers commit extraordinary time personal
sacrifice to serve the NIH - System should be such that all applications are
given an unbiased, fair and high quality review. - Reviewers must know that service on a review
committee is not going to jeopardize their
chances for NIH support - Member applications should be handled in a
consistent manner across CSR/IRGs/Study Sections
3POLICY
- The SRG cannot review an application on which one
of its members is a investigator - The IRG Chief arranges to have the application
reviewed by another SRG with appropriate
expertise or by a SEP - If a SEP, members of the conflicting SRG may
participate but no more than 50 percent of the
total number of individuals involved in the
review may be from the conflicting SRG. - The SRA of the conflicting SRG cannot be in
charge of the review - A member of the conflicting SRG cannot chair the
review.
4What is an application considered Member
Conflict
- PI on application is currently a member of the
assigned SRG - Some other conflict causes an application to be
moved to another study section or SEP ( the
applicant was related to or worked with a current
reviewer, or had recently served on a relevant
study section rare, etc.)
5What is the extent of the issue?
- Current reviewers Applicants that served on
any CSR review panel in the same Council round in
which they had an application reviewed were
considered to be current reviewers.
Table. R01 applications by fiscal year in which
they were reviewed
1 In this and subsequent tables, FY 2005
include the January and May Council rounds only.
6SEP
- If a SEP is composed of fewer than 40 chartered
members (current and recent members within the
past two years), CSR policy states that
percentile rankings will be against the CSR All
base (base of all applications reviewed in CSR
study sections that are percentiled - If it is 40 or above, then the percentile is
against the parent committee
7Issues
- Some members question process
- Are they given the same considerations?
- If they are in a 40 or less SEP should they be
percentiled against CSR All or parent committee? - Are CSR policies being followed correctly (SRA
conflicts, etc.) - Proliferation of Boutique SEPs (7 applications or
less) - Members tend to do exceptionally well in
Boutiques - CSR trying to assign member applications to
another SS instead of SEPS
8SEP vs. Non-SEP Review
Table. All applications represented in this
table were submitted by reviewers serving at the
time that they submitted an application.
Comparisons are review outcomes for applications
submitted by current reviewers whose applications
were reviewed in a member conflict SEP vs. those
reviewed by a committee other than a membership
conflict SEP
9DISCUSSION
- Are Member applications treated fairly?
- Are current practices for reviewing member
applications appropriate and consistent? - What improvements can be made?