Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

How a Study Section works Robert Freund, Ph.D. Scientific Review Administrator Virology B Study Section Center of Scientific Review

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "How a Study Section works Robert Freund, Ph.D. Scientific Review Administrator Virology B Study Section Center of Scientific Review"— Presentation transcript:

1 How a Study Section works Robert Freund, Ph.D. Scientific Review Administrator Virology B Study Section Center of Scientific Review

2 Submitting an application Review of the application The study section After the study section What next? Subjects we will cover:

3 Dual Review System for Grant Applications Second Level of Review Second Level of ReviewCouncil/Institute  Assesses Quality of SRG  Review of Grant Applications  Makes Recommendation to  Institute Staff on Funding  Evaluates Program Priorities  and Relevance  Advises on Policy First Level of Review Scientific Review Group  Provides Initial Scientific Merit  Review of Grant Applications  Rates Applications and Makes Recommendations for Appropriate Level of Support and Duration of Award

4 Center for Scientific Review  Division of Receipt and Referral: Central receipt point for most PHS grant applications  Institute assignment  Assignment to Scientific Review Group  Study Section: Conducts initial scientific merit review of most research applications submitted to the NIH

5 Applications Submitted to NIH Over 60,000 grant applications are submitted to NIH each year.

6 CSR Study Sections  Standing Study Sections when the subject matter of the application matches the referral guidelines for the study section. Each study section has members. Approximately 80 applications are reviewed at each study section meeting  Ad Hoc Special Emphasis Panels (SEPs) when the subject matter does not fit into any study section, or when assignment of an application to the most appropriate study section would create a conflict of interest.

7 Submit Cover Letter Suggest appropriate Institute Multiple institute assignments Suggest appropriate Study Section Go to web site: Description of Study Sections Study Section Rosters

8 How to choose a study section

9

10

11 Assignment Notification Letter  Assignment Number: 2 R01 HL A1  Dual Assignment: NS  Scientific Review Group:  Virology B (VirB)  Information about SRGs may be found on the CSR Home page (http://www.csr.nih.gov)  Scientific Review Administrator:  DR. ROBERT FREUND, SRA  CTR FOR SCIENTIFIC REV  6701 ROCKLEDGE DR RM 3202 MSC7808  BETHESDA MD  (301) Institute/Center: NATL HEART, LUNG, & BLOOD INST DIV/EXTRAMURAL AFFAIRS RK NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH BETHESDA, MD (301)

12 CSR Study Sections Administrative Review Recruitment Standing Members Temporary Members Assignments Match Expertise/Interests with Applications Conflict of Interest Issues Workload of Reviewers

13 Study Section Actions  Unscored (lower half)  Scored, Scientific Merit Rating ( priority scores and percentiles )  Deferral (this cycle, next cycle)

14 Mock Study Section Video

15 Streamlining  Reviewers categorize applications in “lower half” in scientific merit using preliminary scores.  Lower half applications:  Not discussed or scored  Written critiques are provided to the applicant  Not taken to Advisory Council  In most cases, unscored applications have potential and are worth revising

16 Scored Applications Reviewers (usually 3) present opinions Discussion (approx. 15 min. per application) Discuss other considerations (vertebrate animals, human subjects, bioharzards) Score Discuss Budget

17 Review Criteria  Significance: Does the study address an important problem? How will scientific knowledge be advanced?  Approach: Are design and methods well-developed and appropriate? Are problem areas addressed?  Innovation: Are there novel concepts or approaches? Are the aims original and innovative?  Investigator: Is the investigator appropriately trained?  Environment: Does the scientific environment contribute to the probability of success? Are there unique features of the scientific environment? Overall Evaluation & Score Reflects Impact on Field Overall Evaluation & Score Reflects Impact on Field

18 Scores & Percentiles  Reviewers’ scores: 1.0 (best) to 5.0 (worst)  Priority Score:  Average of all reviewers’ scores x 100  Range from 100 to 500  Percentiles ( R01s only ):  Normalizes scores between different Study Sections  Each application is ranked against all applications reviewed in the last year (3 review rounds)

19 Summary Statement Once applications are reviewed, the results are documented by the SRA in a summary statement and forwarded to the Institute (and the PI) where a funding decision is made: Once applications are reviewed, the results are documented by the SRA in a summary statement and forwarded to the Institute (and the PI) where a funding decision is made: The summary statement contains: The summary statement contains:  Overall Resume and Summary of Review Discussion  Essentially Unedited Critiques  Priority Score and Percentile Ranking  Budget Recommendations  Administrative Notes

20 Getting the Results Mailer: score & percentile Program staff: Score & percentile Payline information Advice on revision The NIH Commons Summary Statement

21 After Review? Contact Program Officer Funding Decisions, advise and interpretation Revise Application Address everything in Introduction Don’t follow comments blindly Resubmit

22 NIH Grant Receipt, Review, and Award Schedule Feb-March June-JulyReceipt Dates Oct-NovJune-July Oct-NovReview Dates Feb-MarSept FebNational Advisory Council Board Dates June Dec 1 Apr 1Earliest Possible Beginning Date July 1


Download ppt "How a Study Section works Robert Freund, Ph.D. Scientific Review Administrator Virology B Study Section Center of Scientific Review"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google