Some links will work for NIAID staff only. |
Standard Operating Procedure Table of Contents
|
|
Purpose
To provide peer
reviewers standard review
criteria, and possibly, initiative-specific
review criteria, for judging an application's scientific and technical
merit.
Procedure
Investigator-initiated R01 funding opportunities typically use the standard NIH review criteria only.
Other types of investigator-initiated applications (e.g., P01, R21, R34, and U01) and initiatives (e.g., requests for applications, program announcements) may list additional review criteria in the funding opportunity announcement.
Investigator-Initiated Review Criteria
- Significance. Does this study address an important problem? If the aims are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventions that drive this field?
- Approach. Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design,
methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned,
and appropriate to the aims of the project? Do the PI or PIs acknowledge
potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? For multiple
PI applications, is the leadership
plan consistent with and justified by the project's aims and each
PI's expertise?
- Innovation. Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does it challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice or address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or use novel concepts, approaches, methods, tools, or technologies?
- Investigators. Are the PI or PIs and
other key personnel appropriately trained and well suited
to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience
level
of the PI or PIs and other researchers?
Do the PI or PIs
and investigative team bring complementary and integrated
expertise to the project
(if applicable)?
- Environment. Does the scientific environment or
environments contribute to the probability of success? Do
the studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment
or environments or subject populations?
Do the studies use useful collaborative
arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
Reviewers will also assess the following items in determining
scientific
merit and priority score:
- Protection of Human Subjects from Research
Risk: Involvement
of human subjects and protections from risks related
to their
participation
in the proposed research. For more information, see the Grant Application Guide (for
an electronic application) or PHS 398, Research Plan, Human Subjects Research (for a paper application).
- Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
in Research: Adequacy of plans to include subjects from both
genders, all racial and ethnic
groups (and subgroups), and children, as appropriate, for the scientific
goals of the research. Reviewers will also evaluate plans for recruiting
and retaining subjects. For more information,
see the Grant Application Guide (for
an electronic application) or PHS 398, Research Plan, Human Subjects Research (for a paper application).
- Care and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate
animals are to be used in the project, see the five items described
under the Grant Application Guide (for
an electronic application) or PHS 398, Content of Research Plan, Vertebrate Animals (for a paper application).
Unless the funding opportunity announcement states otherwise, the sharing plans for data from genome-wide association studies and other research data, resources, and model organisms would not affect the score.
Applicants
Program Officers
Scientific Review Officers
Contacts
Applicants with review questions should contact the scientific review officer. For NIAID, see the Scientific Review Program contacts.
For general information, contact Contact for NIAID Staff
For initiative development, contact Contact
for NIAID Staff
If you have knowledge to share or want more information on this topic, email deaweb@niaid.nih.gov with the title of this page or its URL and your question or comment. Thanks for helping us clarify and expand our knowledge base.
Links
Electronic
Application Resources
Grant Application, Electronic SOP
Grant Application, Paper SOP
NIH
Grants Administration Manual - 4204-204B - Peer Review Process
NIH
Grants Policy Statement section on peer review
Scientific Review Meeting
Rosters and Schedules, CSR |