论文部分内容阅读
1946年以来,美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)生物医学领域研究项目的资助一直由学界专家评审确定,但从2003年以来,同行评议在识别优先研究领域方面的作用大大削弱,从而引发很多批评。2015年11月,《The New England Journal of Medicine》杂志发表了题为“Reviewing Peer Review at the NIH”的文章,认为同行评议制度存在一定的局限性:(1)同行评议制度不能识别项目投入和产出是否平衡,这取决于很多复杂的因素;(2)同行评议难以考虑到评分
Since 1946, grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) biomedical research project have been screened by academic experts, but peer review has greatly weakened its role in identifying priority research areas since 2003, triggering many criticisms. In November 2015, The New England Journal of Medicine published an article entitled “Reviewing Peer Review at the NIH”, arguing that the peer review system has some limitations: (1) the peer review system does not recognize the project The balance between input and output depends on many complex factors; (2) Peer review is hard to take into account