What is the research review process of the National Institutes of Health?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

When a grant proposal is submitted to the NIH, it is received by the Division of Research Grants, where it is assigned to a health scientist-administrator, who acts as the primary institute contact for the applicant. The application undergoes two levels of review. The first level of review is by an initial review group, often referred to as a study section, which judges the scientific merit of the application. The second level of review is by an advisory council, which judges the application based on program considerations including funding priorities and funding level.

In the first level of review, the study section provides the initial scientific review of the application, assigns a priority score based on scientific merit, and makes budget recommendations. The primary and secondary reviewers prepare written critiques that evaluate the proposal’s scientific and technical merit, originality, and methodology or research design; examine the qualifications and experience of the investigators; and assess the availability of resources, the appropriateness of the budget and timeline, and ethical issues. The reviewers present their critiques, and then after discussing the proposal, a recommendation is made by majority vote for approval, disapproval, or deferral for additional information. The budget is then discussed in terms of appropriateness.

For each approved proposal, all study section members then vote through a secret ballot using a numerical score from 1.0 (best) to 5.0 (worst). A recommendation for a site visit may be made by the primary reviewer or the executive secretary of the study section who recognizes the need for additional information that cannot be obtained by mail or telephone. After the study section meeting, the scores assigned by the individual members for each approved proposal are averaged and multiplied by 100 to yield a priority score. The executive secretary prepares a summary statement, often called the pink sheets, based on the primary and secondary reviewers’ reports and the discussion at the study section meeting. The summary statement is sent to the principal investigator, and the grant application is then forwarded to the advisory council for further review.

The second level of review is conducted by a national advisory council at each institute. The council reviews the summary statements of all approved applications from each study section, together with the proposals, and adds its own review based on scientific merit and relevance to the program goals of the institute. The executive secretary of a study section attends the council meeting when an application reviewed in his or her section is discussed. The council then makes recommendations on funding to the institute staff. It may concur with or modify actions in study sections on grant applications, or defer them for further review.