1. Peer Review of NIH Research Grant Applications
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health

2. Review Process for a Research Grant
National Institutes of Health
Research
Grant Application
School or Other
Research Center
Center for Scientific Review
Assign to IC & IRG/ Study Section
Initiates Research Idea
Study Section
Submits Application
Review for Scientific Merit
Institute
Evaluate for Relevance
Advisory Councils and Boards
Allocates Funds
Conducts Research
Recommend Action
Institute Director
Takes final action

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

4. National Institutes of Health
Office of the Director
National Institute
on Aging
National Institute
on Alcohol Abuse
and Alcoholism
National Institute
of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases
National Institute
of Arthritis and
Musculoskeletal
and Skin Diseases
National Cancer
Institute
National Institute
of Child Health
and Human
Development
National Institute on
Deafness and Other
Communication
Disorders
National Institute
of Dental and
Craniofacial
Research
National Institute
of Diabetes and
Digestive and
Kidney Diseases
National Institute
on Drug Abuse
National Institute
of Environmental
Health Sciences
National Eye
Institute
National Institute
of General
Medical Sciences
National Heart,
Lung, and Blood
Institute
National Human
Genome Research
Institute
National Institute
of Mental Health
National Institute
of Neurological
Disorders and
Stroke
National Institute
of Nursing Research
National Institute of
Biomedical Imaging
and Bioengineering
National Center
for Complementary
and Alternative
Medicine
Fogarty
International
Center
National Center
for Research
Resources
National Library
of Medicine
National Center on
Minority Health and
Health Disparities
Clinical Center
Center for
Information
Technology
Center for
Scientific Review

5. Center for Scientific Review (CSR)

6. Center for Scientific Review
Referral
Central Receipt Point for PHS Grant Applications
Institute Assignment (Potential Funding Component)
Assignment to Scientific Review Group in CSR or in an Institute
Scientific Review
More than 100 Study Sections that review:
Research Grant Applications
Postdoctoral Fellowship Application
Academic Research Enhancement Award Applications
Small Business Innovation Research Applications

7. Applications are Assigned to:
Scientific review groups based on:
Specific review guidelines for each scientific review group
Institutes based on:
Overall mission of the Institute
Specific programmatic mandates and interests of the Institute

8. Assignment to CSR Study Sections
Applications are assigned to Integrated Review Groups (IRGs) for review. IRGs are clusters of scientifically-related study sections
The IRG assignment is based on specific referral guidelines for each IRG
Each of the 20 IRGs within CSR has standing study sections

9. Organization Chart of Review Divisions
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
Department of Health and Human Services
Division of Molecular and
Cellular Mechanisms
Division of Biologic
Basis of Disease
Division of
Physiology and Pathology
Division of Clinical and
Population-based Studies
Bioengineering Sciences and Technologies
AIDS and Related Research
Cardiovascular Sciences
Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes
Biological Chemistry and Macromolecular Biophysics
Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive Sciences
Digestive Sciences
Brain Disorders and
Clinical Neuroscience
Immunology
Biology of Development and Aging
AIDS and Related Research
Health of the Population
Hematology
Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
Risk, Prevention and Health Behavior
Integrative, Functional and
Cognitive Neuroscience
Cell Biology
Oncological Sciences
Surgical Sciences, Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Genes, Genomes and Genetics
Musculoskeletal, Oral and
Skin Sciences
Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Neuroscience
Renal and Urological Sciences
Respiratory Sciences
Revised on April 16, 2003.

10. Assignment to CSR Study Sections (continued)
Within an IRG, applications are assigned for review to
Standing Study Sections when the subject matter of the application matches the referral guidelines for the study section
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. Also used for special mechanisms (e.g., fellowships, SBIRs, AREAS)

11. Musculoskeletal, Oral and Skin Sciences IRG [MOSS]
The Musculoskeletal, Oral and Skin Sciences [MOSS] IRG will consider research applications that address structural systems that are prerequisite for physical form, mechanical function, movement, and integrity of the body. These structural systems and their components are the basis for the organization of the study sections of this IRG and are described according to the following topical areas: skeleton, spine, bone, connective tissue, extracellular matrix, and their related diseases/disorders; dental/oral and craniofacial and their related diseases/disorders; skeletal muscle, limb, and their related diseases/disorders; joints and their related diseases/disorders, including rheumatic diseases; skin and its related diseases/disorders. Autoimmune diseases are specifically included. For these topical areas, the studies considered range from molecular genetics and stem cell research to animal models and clinical trials. For each major topical area, the research applications may include studies of: basic biology, including growth, development, maturation, and aging; biomaterials for prostheses/orthotics and implants; pathogenesis and therapeutics; physical rehabilitation; exercise; mechanobiology/biomechanics; injury and repair, including adaptation, plasticity, degeneration, and regeneration; diagnostic markers and biomarkers; cell and gene-based therapies; and clinical outcomes and trials. The following Study Sections are included within the MOSS IRG: Oral, Dental and Craniofacial Sciences [ODCS] Skeletal Biology Development and Disease [SBDD] Skeletal Biology Structure and Regeneration [SBSR] Skeletal Muscle Biology and Exercise Physiology [SMEP] Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Sciences [MRS] Arthritis, Connective Tissue, and Skin [ACTS] General Medicine B Study Section [GMB] Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/ Fibromyalgia Syndrome Special Emphasis Panel [CFS SEP] Urology Study Section [UROL SEP] Bioengineering Research Partnerships/Grants Special Emphasis Panel [SSS-M] MOSS Small Business Activities [SBIR/STTR SEPs]

12. Assignment to Institutes
Applications are referred to an Institute or Center as the potential funding component:
This assignment is based on a match between the research proposed and the overall mission of the Institute or Center
Where applications are appropriate for more than one Institute or Center, multiple assignments are made

13. Peer Review in CSR
CSR Study Sections are managed by a Scientific Review Administrator (SRA) who is a professional, usually at the Ph.D. level, whose scientific background is close to the expertise of the study section
Each CSR standing study section has members who are primarily from academia
As many as applications are reviewed at each study section meeting

14. Selection of Peer Reviewers
Active and Productive
Researchers
Research
Capability
Non-Research
Non-Doctoral
Scientific Community

15. Criteria For Selection of Peer Reviewers
Demonstrated Scientific Expertise
Doctoral Degree or Equivalent
Mature Judgment
Work Effectively in a Group Context
Breadth of Perspective
Impartiality
Interest in Serving
Adequate Representation of Women and Minority Scientists

16. Review Process for a Research Grant Application

17. Review of Research Grants
REVIEW CRITERIA:
Significance
Approach
Innovation
Investigator
Environment
Overall Evaluation & Score Reflects Impact on Field

18. Review Criteria (continued)
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?

19. Research Involving Human Subjects
Important Considerations
Is the proposed study exempt from human subject review?
Are there any apparent risks* to the human subjects?
Are the protections adequate?
What are the potential benefits to the subjects and to mankind?
Are the inclusions of minorities and both genders adequately addressed?
*”Risks” include the possibility of physical, psychological,
or social injury resulting from research.

20. Research Involving Children
Children must be considered for inclusion in all human subject research supported by NIH
Effective for all new applications received after October 1, 1998
Child is defined as an individual under age 21
If children are included, Investigator must address
age range
expertise of investigative team
facilities
sufficient numbers

21. Animal Welfare Important Considerations
Will the anticipated results be for the good of society?
Will the work be planned and performed by qualified scientists?
Will the animals be treated so as to avoid any unnecessary discomfort, pain, anxiety, or poor health?
Species chosen
Animals in short supply

22. Scientific Review Group or Study Section Actions
Scored, Scientific Merit Rating (priority scores and percentiles)
Unscored (lower half)
Deferral

23. 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:
The summary statement contains:
Overall Resume and Summary of Review Discussion
Essentially Unedited Critiques
Priority Score and Percentile Ranking
Budget Recommendations
Administrative Notes

24. National Advisory Council or Board Review

25. Council Actions Concurrence with study section action
Modification of study section action
Deferral for re-review

26. What Determines Which Awards Are Made?
Scientific merit
Program Considerations
Availability of funds

27. Information on the World Wide Web Selected Sites of Interest
National Institutes of Health (
Office of Extramural Research (
Grants Policy (
Center for Scientific Review (
Referral and Review (
Overview of Peer Review Process ( csr.nih.gov/review/peerrev.htm)
CSR Study Section Rosters (
NIH Peer Review Notes (