Does peer review predict the performance of research projects in health sciences?

被引:13
|
作者
Clavería, LE
Guallar, E
Camí, J
Conde, J
Pastor, R
Ricoy, JR
Rodríguez-Farré, E
Ruiz-Palomo, F
Muñoz, E
机构
[1] Hosp Gen Segovia, Secc Neurol, Segovia 40002, Spain
[2] Inst Salud Carlos III, Natl Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Madrid, Spain
[3] Inst Municipal Invest Med, E-08003 Barcelona, Spain
[4] Univ Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
[5] Inst Salud Carlos III, Agcy Hlth Technol Assessment, Madrid, Spain
[6] Hosp 12 Octubre, Neuropathol Unit, E-28041 Madrid, Spain
[7] CSIC, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Barcelona, Spain
[8] Hosp Ramon y Cajal, Div Internal Med, E-28034 Madrid, Spain
[9] Inst Adv Sociol Res, Madrid, Spain
关键词
D O I
10.1023/A:1005609624130
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Peer review is a basic component of the scientific process, but its performance has seldom been evaluated systematically. To determine whether pre-approval characteristics of research projects predicted the performance of projects, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of all 2744 single-centre research projects financed by the Spanish Health Research Fund since 1988 and completed before 1996. Peer review scores of grant applications were significant predictors of performance of funded projects, and the likelihood of production was also higher for projects with a basic research component, longer duration, higher budget or a financed research fellow. Funding agencies should monitor their selection process and assess the performance of funded projects to design future strategies in supporting health sciences research.
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 23
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] An overview of the peer review process in biomedical sciences
    Miller, Edward
    James Weightman, Michael
    Basu, Ashna
    Amos, Andrew
    Brakoulias, Vlasios
    AUSTRALASIAN PSYCHIATRY, 2024, 32 (03) : 247 - 251
  • [32] An overview of the peer review process in biomedical sciences
    不详
    AUSTRALASIAN PSYCHIATRY, 2024, 32 (04) : 289 - 289
  • [33] Inequity in Peer Review in Communication Sciences and Disorders
    Girolamo, Teresa M.
    Castro, Nichol
    Fannin, Danai Kasambira
    Ghali, Samantha
    Mandulak, Kerry
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY, 2022, 31 (04) : 1898 - 1912
  • [34] Online peer review: perceptions in the biological sciences
    Wood, D
    Hurst, P
    LEARNED PUBLISHING, 2000, 13 (02) : 95 - 100
  • [35] PEER-REVIEW RELIABILITY - THE HIERARCHY OF THE SCIENCES
    CROTHERS, C
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 1993, 16 (02) : 398 - 399
  • [36] AN OVERVIEW OF THE PEER REVIEW PROCESS IN BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES
    Miller, E.
    Weightman, M.
    Amos, A.
    AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2024, 58 : 27 - 28
  • [37] Directing research funds to the right research projects: a review of criteria used by research organisations in Australia in prioritising health research projects for funding
    Tuffaha, Haitham W.
    El Saifi, Najwan
    Chambers, Suzanne K.
    Scuffham, Paul A.
    BMJ OPEN, 2018, 8 (12):
  • [38] Dealing with Ethical Aspects in Student Research Projects - Results of a Survey of Health Sciences Faculties in Germany
    Seifert, Imke
    Konusch, Saskia
    Gerhardus, Ansgar
    GESUNDHEITSWESEN, 2021, 83 (08/09) : 645 - 650
  • [39] Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences
    Eakin, JM
    Mykhalovskiy, E
    JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2003, 9 (02) : 187 - 194
  • [40] Current performance and future trends in health care sciences and services research
    Qiang Yao
    Peng-Hui Lyu
    Lian-Ping Yang
    Lan Yao
    Zhi-Yong Liu
    Scientometrics, 2014, 101 : 751 - 779