Peer Review of Grant Applications Criteria Used and Qualitative Study of Reviewer Practices 英文参考文献.docVIP

下载本文档

7
0
约6.9万字
约 15页
2017-05-12 发布于上海
举报
版权申诉

Peer Review of Grant Applications Criteria Used and Qualitative Study of Reviewer Practices 英文参考文献.doc

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

Peer Review of Grant Applications Criteria Used and Qualitative Study of Reviewer Practices 英文参考文献

PeerReviewofGrantApplications:CriteriaUsedand QualitativeStudyofReviewerPractices HendyAbdoul1,2,3*,ChristophePerrey1,3,4,PhilippeAmiel4,FlorenceTubach2,5,SergeGottot1,2,3 , IsabelleDurand-Zaleski6,CorinneAlberti1,2,3 1AP-HP,Ho?pitalRobertDebre′, Unite′ d’e′pide′miologieclinique,Paris,France,2Universite′ ParisDiderot,SorbonneParisCite′,Paris,France,3INSERM,CIE5,Paris,France, 4Institutdecance′rologie GustaveRoussy,Unite′ derechercheenscienceshumainesetsociales,Villejuif,France,5AP-HP,Ho?pitalBichat-ClaudeBernard,De′partement d’e′pide′miologie,biostatistiquesetrechercheclinique,Paris,France,6AP-HP,Unite′derecherchecliniqueene′conomiedelasante′,De′partementdelarechercheclinique etdude′veloppement, Paris,France Abstract Background:Peerreviewofgrantapplicationshasbeencriticizedaslackingreliability.Studiesshowingpooragreement amongreviewerssupportedthispossibilitybutusuallyfocusedonreviewers’scoresandfailedtoinvestigatereasonsfor disagreement. Here, our goal wastodetermine how reviewers rate applications, by investigating reviewer practices and grantassessmentcriteria. Methods and Findings: We first collected and analyzed a convenience sample of French and international calls for proposals andassessment guidelines, fromwhich wecreatedanoveralltypologyofassessment criteria comprisingnine domainsrelevancetothecallforproposals,usefulness,originality,innovativeness,methodology,feasibility,funding,ethical aspects, and writing of the grant application. We then performed a qualitative study of reviewer practices, particularly regarding the use of assessment criteria, among reviewers of the French Academic Hospital Research Grant Agencies (Programmes Hospitaliers de Recherche Clinique, PHRCs). Semi-structured interviews and observation sessions were conducted.Boththetimespentassessingeachgrantapplicationandtheassessmentmethodsvariedacrossreviewers.The assessmentcriteriarecommendedbythePHRCswerelistedbyallreviewersasfrequentlyevaluatedanduseful.However, use of the PHRC