Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: an observational study

نویسندگان

  • Adrian G Barnett
  • Danielle L Herbert
  • Megan Campbell
  • Naomi Daly
  • Jason A Roberts
  • Alison Mudge
  • Nicholas Graves
چکیده

BACKGROUND Despite the widely recognised importance of sustainable health care systems, health services research remains generally underfunded in Australia. The Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) is funding health services research in the state of Queensland. AusHSI has developed a streamlined protocol for applying and awarding funding using a short proposal and accelerated peer review. METHOD An observational study of proposals for four health services research funding rounds from May 2012 to November 2013. A short proposal of less than 1,200 words was submitted using a secure web-based portal. The primary outcome measures are: time spent preparing proposals; a simplified scoring of grant proposals (reject, revise or accept for interview) by a scientific review committee; and progressing from submission to funding outcomes within eight weeks. Proposals outside of health services research were deemed ineligible. RESULTS There were 228 eligible proposals across 4 funding rounds: from 29% to 79% were shortlisted and 9% to 32% were accepted for interview. Success rates increased from 6% (in 2012) to 16% (in 2013) of eligible proposals. Applicants were notified of the outcomes within two weeks from the interview; which was a maximum of eight weeks after the submission deadline. Applicants spent 7 days on average preparing their proposal. Applicants with a ranking of reject or revise received written feedback and suggested improvements for their proposals, and resubmissions composed one third of the 2013 rounds. CONCLUSIONS The AusHSI funding scheme is a streamlined application process that has simplified the process of allocating health services research funding for both applicants and peer reviewers. The AusHSI process has minimised the time from submission to notification of funding outcomes.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Using simplified peer review processes to fund research: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE To prospectively test two simplified peer review processes, estimate the agreement between the simplified and official processes, and compare the costs of peer review. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING A prospective parallel study of Project Grant proposals submitted in 2013 to the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. The official funding outcomes were c...

متن کامل

On the time spent preparing grant proposals: an observational study of Australian researchers

OBJECTIVE To estimate the time spent by the researchers for preparing grant proposals, and to examine whether spending more time increase the chances of success. DESIGN Observational study. SETTING The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. PARTICIPANTS Researchers who submitted one or more NHMRC Project Grant proposals in March 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES To...

متن کامل

A Review on the Editorial Peer Review

Background and Objectives: The editorial peer review has an important role in the publication of scientific articles. Peers or reviewers are those scholars who have the expertise regarding the topic of a given article. They critically appraise the articles without having any monetary incentives or conflicts of interest. The aim of this study was to determine the most important aspects of the ed...

متن کامل

Peer Review, Program Officers and Science Funding

Increased competition for research funding has led to growth in proposal submissions and lower funding-success rates. An agent-based model of the funding cycle, accounting for variations in program officer and reviewer behaviors, for a range of funding rates, is used to assess the efficiency of different proposal-submission strategies. Program officers who use more reviewers and require consens...

متن کامل

The Use of Societal Impacts Considerations in Grant Proposal Peer Review: a Comparison of Five Models

Increasing demands on the part of the public for a demonstrable return on their investment in scientific and technical research have led to the widespread introduction of considerations of societal impacts into the peer review processes at public science and technology funding agencies. This answer to the accountability challenge also introduces a peculiar strain on peer review: expertise in pa...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 15  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2015