Show simple item record

Sample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Review

dc.contributor.authorKaplan, Daviden_GB
dc.contributor.authorLacetera, Nicolaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorKaplan, Celiaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorTregenza, Tomen_GB
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Exeteren_GB
dc.date.accessioned2008-09-28T19:35:52Zen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-25T11:47:04Zen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2013-03-20T14:48:48Z
dc.date.issued2008-07-23en_GB
dc.description.abstractThe Working Group on Peer Review of the Advisory Committee to the Director of NIH has recommended that at least 4 reviewers should be used to assess each grant application. A sample size analysis of the number of reviewers needed to evaluate grant applications reveals that a substantially larger number of evaluators are required to provide the level of precision that is currently mandated. NIH should adjust their peer review system to account for the number of reviewers needed to provide adequate precision in their evaluations.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPLoS ONE 2008 3(7)en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0002761en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10036/38239en_GB
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_GB
dc.rightsKaplan et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en_GB
dc.titleSample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Reviewen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2008-07-23en_GB
dc.date.available2008-09-28T19:35:52Zen_GB
dc.date.available2011-01-25T11:47:04Zen_GB
dc.date.available2013-03-20T14:48:48Z
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203en_GB
dc.identifier.journalPLoS ONEen_GB
dc.identifier.pmcid2447157en_GB
dc.identifier.pmid18648494en_GB


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record