Show Summary Details
Page of

Center for Scientific Review and the Peer Review Process 

Center for Scientific Review and the Peer Review Process
Chapter:
Center for Scientific Review and the Peer Review Process
Author(s):

Michelle L. Kienholz

and Jeremy M. Berg

DOI:
10.1093/med/9780199989645.003.0003
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD MEDICINE ONLINE (www.oxfordmedicine.com). © Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Medicine Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 13 June 2021

This chapter explains the process by which the NIH refers (for funding and review assignments) and then conducts the peer review process; reasons for return of applications are also discussed. We focus on the Center for Scientific Review but also note that certain grant applications are reviewed by study sections maintained by individual Institutes and Centers. The reader learns the importance of researching and picking the best study section even before preparing the application (versus at the end, when it is too late to tailor the narrative to the reviewers’ expertise and interests) and then writing and formatting the application to make the reviewers’ task as easy as possible. We explain how the peer review process works as well as both scoring and percentiling (versus success rate).

Access to the complete content on Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.