HRA uses “robust scientific review” as part of the eligibility criteria for membership. But what does that mean? How is that different from the traditional peer review? Is the traditional method of NIH peer review successful at fairly and accurately evaluating applications? How can we reduce bias in reviews, implicit and otherwise? These and many other questions have been tackled by HRA members and others. You can find links to studies, meeting presentations, papers, and other resources here as well as the Grants Administration working group and by searching the Resources section.
- Perceptions of Risk Evaluation in Grant Peer Review by Applicants and Reviewers [American Institute of Biological Sciences, February 2018]
- Validity of Peer Review Examined by American Institute of Biological Sciences [Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, August 2018]
- American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) Council of Member Societies and Organizations
- Transparency, Recognition and Innovation in Peer Review in the Life Sciences [ASAPBio Meeting Summary, February 2018]