2 Comments
The Center for Scientific Review just released their latest Peer Review Notes newsletter. There are several articles that you may be interested in, including:
- Moving Forward After an Unsuccessful A1 Application
- Hybrid Video and Face-to-Face Reviews: The Best of Both Worlds?
- CSR’s Early Career Reviewer Training Program Is a Hit
The bio-sketch as is now is just fine. I do not see any need to expand it any further, since most reviews are prejudiced towards different schools and regions of the country. It will be great if NIH reviews are blinded with regards to investigator’s name and bio-sketch as are DoD grants. I wish NIH could level the playing field for all investigators. By that I mean PI from different schools.
I can’t imagine submitting a grant where the reviewers are not able to figure out immediately who I am. We have to reference our prior work to establish credibility and a history of being experts in the area of what we’re proposing. As soon as you do, the cat is out of the bag. Perhaps new investigators can be anonymous but that’s a small group. If indeed the reviewers can’t figure out who is applying, I would question their knowledge of the field (basically unrealistic situation).