CSR Initiatives to Strengthen Peer Review
CSR is committed to strengthening the peer review process. Learn about our commitment and relevant data.
Bias Awareness and Mitigation Training for Reviewers, Chairs, and SROs
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cae53/cae53067a16b95997992fb67e2965f1bbc3126f6" alt="trophy icon trophy icon"
16,646
As of Dec 2022, 16,646 reviewers have completed the training.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4b729/4b729601a14fba53641b98be0c02c5ed19edf324" alt="identify icon identify icon"
91%
91% of reviewers thought that the training substantially improved their ability to identify bias in peer review.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e06e1/e06e1c40b117dfb8d7cb59ec6d19c15fe09c37e5" alt="bias icon bias icon"
93%
93% of reviewers stated the training made them substantially more comfortable intervening against bias.
CSR developed training specifically targeted toward mitigating the most common biases in the peer review process. The training includes personal testimonials, interactive exercises, and a narrated mock study section demonstrating techniques to intervene – all based on real-life examples. The training was developed with the assistance of the CSR Advisory Council Working Group. Training has been provided to all CSR reviewers since August 2021.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd584/fd58484ef831cb1237569dd8d3e9cfcc2a72f4f2" alt="01_Identify_Review_Bias_Chart 01_Identify_Review_Bias_Chart"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e7d9/7e7d910a615eeb09578d86f231f00a5e26da9c9d" alt="02_Comfortable_Intervening_on_Review_Bias 02_Comfortable_Intervening_on_Review_Bias"
Return to top
Reporting Avenues for Unfair Reviews, Uncivil Conduct on Panels
CSR launched a widely-publicized reporting avenue for issues related to respectful interactions or anything else that could affect the fairness of the review process. The reporting channel is open to all – investigators, reviewers, and program staff.
Investigate
Every allegation is carefully investigated by CSR senior management.
Resolve
If we agree the review was flawed, CSR will re-review application in the same council round. If we don’t agree, the official NIH appeals process remains available to all investigators.
Closure and Culture Change
Re-review? CSR Scientific Division Director discusses the issue with the reviewer, if appropriate. Actions might also include not inviting the reviewer to serve in the future.
Report a Concern
Send a message to
reportconcern@csr.nih.gov
Return to top
Exploring Changes to Review to Make it More Fair and Effective
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd53e/fd53e132252dd1caadae873804fd6388b24e8cdf" alt="More-Fair-and-Effective-review Exploring blinded review processes photo"
Leading efforts to simplify review criteria
CSR Advisory Council working groups (Clinical Trials, Non-Clinical Trials) developed recommendations to simplify review criteria in a way that focuses reviewers on the importance and feasibility of the research proposed and in which reputation of the investigator and institution, in the global sense, do not have a place. The reorganization of the current five review criteria into three factors allow for the possibility of a multi-stage, partially-blinded review process in the future. These recommendations were considered and modified by NIH leadership; see details of the proposed review framework. NIH gathered additional input from the scientific community on the proposed changes through a Request for Information, which closed March 10, 2023. An overview of the input received from more than 800 individuals, scientific societies, and academic institutions has been shared on Review Matters and a content analysis posted.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fcf0e/fcf0e986a9778d4be221b9576892acf171af39a9" alt="Current-proposed Current-proposed"
Improving NRSA Fellowship Review
A CSR Advisory Council Working Group on Fellowship Review developed recommendations to modify the review criteria and change the required application materials for NRSA fellowship applications. The changes are expected to make the process more fair and more effective in identifying the next generation of promising scientists.
Review criteria will be modified to better focus reviewers on three key assessments: (1) potential of the applicant; (2) strength of the science; (3) quality of the training plan. In order to provide equal opportunity, accomplishments of the applicant will be evaluated in the context of their opportunities. Sponsor and institution will be evaluated with respect to the quality of the proposed science and quality of the training plan, minimizing effects of reputation. Changes in required application materials fit with the modified review criteria. Importantly, coursework grades will no longer be considered.
Details of the recommended changes can be found here. These recommendations were considered and approved by NIH leadership. An RFI was issued to gather additional input from the public and closed in June 2023. Responses to the RFI were supportive but underscored the need for ample communications and thoughtful guidance and training for investigators, reviewers, and NIH staff. An NIH Guide Notice will be issued in late 2023 with more information.