Website Search
Find information on spaces, staff, and services.
Find information on spaces, staff, and services.
cdi_plos_journals_2037485761
--- !ruby/object:Document::ArticleItem::General data: pnx: sort: creationdate: - '20180511' author: - Shepherd, Jonathan ; Frampton, Geoff K ; Pickett, Karen ; Wyatt, Jeremy C title: - 'Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency' control: iscdi: - 'true' sourceid: - gale_plos_ recordid: - cdi_plos_journals_2037485761 sourcerecordid: - A538194994 originalsourceid: - FETCH-LOGICAL-c658t-8dc351ea00f96c9cf91a850522d4986a8e259deae8bc0ebee60eec43beb46d13 recordtype: - article addsrcrecordid: - eNptk99u0zAUxiMEYmPwBggiISG4aLGT2LG5QKom_lSaNC4mbi3HPm49JXaxk0LfgMfGbbPRoCkXib78zmefo-9k2UuM5ris8YdbPwQn2_nGO5gjzCnH1aPsHPOymNEClY9Pvs-yZzHeIkRKRunT7KzgNUEM1efZn-8AIQ-wtfAr9yZfg2z7dRIiyKDWuRmctm6Vb4Lf-Cjb-DFf5HEXe-hkb1XeyU0unT6V_plZ5_w2ad7F3PiQgzGgersFBzEeypJilQWnds-zJybZw4vxfZHdfPl8c_ltdnX9dXm5uJopSlg_Y1qVBINEyHCquDIcS0YQKQpdcUYlg4JwDRJYoxA0ABQBqKpsoKmoxuVF9vpou2l9FOMMo0gzqitGaronlkdCe3krNsF2MuyEl1YcBB9WQobUZwtC07JkuNGKN2XFDUiKGCaaQQm8ahhNXp_G04amA63A9UG2E9PpH2fXYuW3gvCqZrxOBu9Gg-B_DhB70dmooG2lAz8c7s2KmnDCE_rmP_Th7kZqJVMD1hmfzlV7U7FI6cC84rxK1PwBKj0aOqtS4IxN-qTg_aQgMT387ldyiFEsr39M2bcn7DFw0bfDISdTsDqCKvgYA5j7wWEk9jtw16HY74AYdyCVvTod-n3RXejLv6h0Bgc sourcetype: - Open Website sourceformat: - XML sourcesystem: - Other pqid: - '2037485761' galeid: - A538194994 score: - '0.0026427954' addata: orcidid: - https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1682-4330 issn: - 1932-6203 addtitle: - PLoS One abstract: - |- To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review 'innovations'. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality. jtitle: - PloS one genre: - article au: - Shepherd, Jonathan - Frampton, Geoff K - Pickett, Karen - Wyatt, Jeremy C atitle: - 'Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency' date: - '2018-05-11' risdate: - '2018' volume: - '13' issue: - '5' spage: - e0196914 epage: - e0196914 pages: - e0196914-e0196914 eissn: - 1932-6203 ristype: - JOUR notes: - ObjectType-Article-2 - SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 - ObjectType-Feature-3 - content type line 23 - ObjectType-Review-1 - ObjectType-Undefined-4 - 'Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.' cop: - United States pub: - Public Library of Science doi: - 10.1371/journal.pone.0196914 pmid: - '29750807' tpages: - e0196914 oa: - free_for_read format: - journal links: openurl: - "$$Topenurl_article" openurlfulltext: - "$$Topenurlfull_article" backlink: - "$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29750807$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read" thumbnail: - "$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl" linktopdf: - "$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2037485761/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read" linktohtml: - "$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2037485761?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read" search: creationdate: - '2018' title: - 'Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency' - PloS one orcidid: - https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1682-4330 creatorcontrib: - Shepherd, Jonathan - Frampton, Geoff K - Pickett, Karen - Wyatt, Jeremy C creator: - Shepherd, Jonathan - Frampton, Geoff K - Pickett, Karen - Wyatt, Jeremy C contributor: - Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth subject: - Bias - Collaboration - Councils - Efficiency - Engineering and Technology - Feasibility studies - Funding - Innovations - Medical research - Medicine - Medicine and Health Sciences - Medicine, Experimental - Methods - Peer review - Peer review of research grant proposals - Proposals - Public health - Quality - Quality management - R&D - Research & development - Research and Analysis Methods - Research funding - Reviews - Science Policy - Scientometrics - Stakeholders - Synthesis - Systematic review - Teleconferencing - Videoconferencing issn: - 1932-6203 - 1932-6203 fulltext: - 'true' addtitle: - PLoS One general: - Public Library of Science - Public Library of Science (PLoS) rsrctype: - article startdate: - '20180511' enddate: - '20180511' scope: - NPM - AAYXX - CITATION - 3V. - 7QG - 7QL - 7QO - 7RV - 7SN - 7SS - 7T5 - 7TG - 7TM - 7U9 - 7X2 - 7X7 - 7XB - 88E - 8AO - 8C1 - 8FD - 8FE - 8FG - 8FH - 8FI - 8FJ - 8FK - ABJCF - ABUWG - AFKRA - ARAPS - ATCPS - AZQEC - BBNVY - BENPR - BGLVJ - BHPHI - C1K - D1I - DWQXO - FR3 - FYUFA - GHDGH - GNUQQ - H94 - HCIFZ - K9. - KB. - KB0 - KL. - L6V - LK8 - M0K - M0S - M1P - M7N - M7P - M7S - NAPCQ - P5Z - P62 - P64 - PATMY - PDBOC - PIMPY - PQEST - PQQKQ - PQUKI - PTHSS - PYCSY - RC3 - 7X8 - 5PM - DOA sourceid: - ATCPS - BGLVJ - DOA recordid: - eNptk99u0zAUxiMEYmPwBggiISG4aLGT2LG5QKom_lSaNC4mbi3HPm49JXaxk0LfgMfGbbPRoCkXib78zmefo-9k2UuM5ris8YdbPwQn2_nGO5gjzCnH1aPsHPOymNEClY9Pvs-yZzHeIkRKRunT7KzgNUEM1efZn-8AIQ-wtfAr9yZfg2z7dRIiyKDWuRmctm6Vb4Lf-Cjb-DFf5HEXe-hkb1XeyU0unT6V_plZ5_w2ad7F3PiQgzGgersFBzEeypJilQWnds-zJybZw4vxfZHdfPl8c_ltdnX9dXm5uJopSlg_Y1qVBINEyHCquDIcS0YQKQpdcUYlg4JwDRJYoxA0ABQBqKpsoKmoxuVF9vpou2l9FOMMo0gzqitGaronlkdCe3krNsF2MuyEl1YcBB9WQobUZwtC07JkuNGKN2XFDUiKGCaaQQm8ahhNXp_G04amA63A9UG2E9PpH2fXYuW3gvCqZrxOBu9Gg-B_DhB70dmooG2lAz8c7s2KmnDCE_rmP_Th7kZqJVMD1hmfzlV7U7FI6cC84rxK1PwBKj0aOqtS4IxN-qTg_aQgMT387ldyiFEsr39M2bcn7DFw0bfDISdTsDqCKvgYA5j7wWEk9jtw16HY74AYdyCVvTod-n3RXejLv6h0Bgc recordtype: - article description: - |- To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review 'innovations'. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality. delivery: fulltext: - fulltext delcategory: - Remote Search Resource display: title: - 'Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency' creator: - Shepherd, Jonathan ; Frampton, Geoff K ; Pickett, Karen ; Wyatt, Jeremy C contributor: - Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth subject: - Bias ; Collaboration ; Councils ; Efficiency ; Engineering and Technology ; Feasibility studies ; Funding ; Innovations ; Medical research ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Medicine, Experimental ; Methods ; Peer review ; Peer review of research grant proposals ; Proposals ; Public health ; Quality ; Quality management ; R&D ; Research & development ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Research funding ; Reviews ; Science Policy ; Scientometrics ; Stakeholders ; Synthesis ; Systematic review ; Teleconferencing ; Videoconferencing language: - eng type: - article source: - DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals - ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science - Technology Collection - PubMed (Medline) - PLoS (Open access) - EBSCOhost Academic Search Premier publisher: - 'United States: Public Library of Science' ispartof: - PloS one, 2018-05, Vol.13 (5), p.e0196914-e0196914 identifier: - 'ISSN: 1932-6203' - 'EISSN: 1932-6203' - 'DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196914' - 'PMID: 29750807' rights: - COPYRIGHT 2018 Public Library of Science - COPYRIGHT 2018 Public Library of Science - '2018 Shepherd et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.' - 2018 Shepherd et al 2018 Shepherd et al oa: - free_for_read lds50: - peer_reviewed description: - |- To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review 'innovations'. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality. facets: creationdate: - '2018' creatorcontrib: - Shepherd, Jonathan - Frampton, Geoff K - Pickett, Karen - Wyatt, Jeremy C rsrctype: - articles language: - eng topic: - Bias - Collaboration - Councils - Efficiency - Engineering and Technology - Feasibility studies - Funding - Innovations - Medical research - Medicine - Medicine and Health Sciences - Medicine, Experimental - Methods - Peer review - Peer review of research grant proposals - Proposals - Public health - Quality - Quality management - R&D - Research & development - Research and Analysis Methods - Research funding - Reviews - Science Policy - Scientometrics - Stakeholders - Synthesis - Systematic review - Teleconferencing - Videoconferencing prefilter: - articles collection: - PubMed - CrossRef - ProQuest Central (Corporate) - Animal Behavior Abstracts - Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B) - Biotechnology Research Abstracts - Nursing & Allied Health Database - Ecology Abstracts - Entomology Abstracts (Full archive) - Immunology Abstracts - Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Nucleic Acids Abstracts - Virology and AIDS Abstracts - Agricultural Science Collection - ProQuest - Health & Medical Complete保健、医学与药学数据库 - ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) - Medical Database (Alumni Edition) - ProQuest Pharma Collection - ProQuest Public Health Database - Technology Research Database - ProQuest SciTech Collection - ProQuest Technology Collection - ProQuest Natural Science Collection - Hospital Premium Collection - Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) - ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) - Materials Science & Engineering Collection - ProQuest Central (Alumni) - ProQuest Central - Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database (1962 - current) - ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science - ProQuest Central Essentials - Biological Science Collection - ProQuest Central - Technology Collection - ProQuest Natural Science Collection - Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management - ProQuest Materials Science Collection - ProQuest Central - Engineering Research Database - Health Research Premium Collection - Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) - ProQuest Central Student - AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts - SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3) - ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) - Materials Science Database - Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) - Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic - ProQuest Engineering Collection - Biological Sciences - Agriculture Science Database - Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition) - PML(ProQuest Medical Library) - Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C) - Biological Science Database - Engineering Database - Nursing & Allied Health Premium - ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals - ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection - Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts - Environmental Science Database - Materials Science Collection - ProQuest - Publicly Available Content Database - ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) - ProQuest One Academic - ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition - Engineering collection - Environmental Science Collection - Genetics Abstracts - MEDLINE - Academic - PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) - DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals toplevel: - peer_reviewed - online_resources frbrgroupid: - cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c658t-8dc351ea00f96c9cf91a850522d4986a8e259deae8bc0ebee60eec43beb46d13 frbrtype: - '5' jtitle: - PloS one delivery: link: [] deliveryCategory: - Remote Search Resource availability: - fulltext displayLocation: false additionalLocations: false physicalItemTextCodes: '' feDisplayOtherLocations: false displayedAvailability: 'true' holding: [] almaOpenurl: https://na02.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/01UWI_MAD/openurl?ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&ctx_tim=2024-06-05 07:44:44&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Peer+review+of+health+research+funding+proposals%3A+A+systematic+map+and+systematic+review+of+innovations+for+effectiveness+and+efficiency&rft.jtitle=PloS+one&rft.au=Shepherd%2C+Jonathan&rft.date=2018-05-11&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e0196914&rft.epage=e0196914&rft.pages=e0196914-e0196914&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0196914&rft.pub=Public+Library+of+Science&rft.place=United+States&rft_id=info:pmid/29750807&rft_dat=<gale_plos_>A538194994</gale_plos_>&svc_dat=viewit&rft_galeid=A538194994&rft_pqid=2037485761 context: PC adaptor: Primo Central extras: citationTrails: citing: - FETCH-LOGICAL-c658t-8dc351ea00f96c9cf91a850522d4986a8e259deae8bc0ebee60eec43beb46d13 citedby: - FETCH-LOGICAL-c658t-8dc351ea00f96c9cf91a850522d4986a8e259deae8bc0ebee60eec43beb46d13 timesCited: {} "@id": https://na02.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/primaws/rest/pub/pnxs/PC/cdi_plos_journals_2037485761
Full text is available
Resource is "open" so no proxy will be added
This document needs electronic context lookup (uresolver)
--- - :service_type: getFullTxt :collection_name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals :coverage_statement: Available from 2006. :public_note: Coverage dates vary. Some content is freely available.<br/> :from_nz: false :filtered: false :filter_reason: '' :direct_link: https://wisconsin-madison.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=49626697590002122&institutionId=2122&customerId=2120 - :service_type: getFullTxt :collection_name: EBSCOhost Academic Search Premier :coverage_statement: Available from 01/01/2008. :public_note: '' :from_nz: false :filtered: false :filter_reason: '' :direct_link: https://wisconsin-madison.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=49626697600002122&institutionId=2122&customerId=2120 - :service_type: getFullTxt :collection_name: PubMed Central :coverage_statement: 'Available from 2006 volume: 1.' :public_note: May have limited fulltext access to some recent content<br/> :from_nz: false :filtered: false :filter_reason: '' :direct_link: https://wisconsin-madison.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=49626697580002122&institutionId=2122&customerId=2120 - :service_type: getFullTxt :collection_name: Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access :coverage_statement: 'Available from 2006 volume: 1 issue: 1.' :public_note: '' :from_nz: false :filtered: false :filter_reason: '' :direct_link: https://wisconsin-madison.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=49626697560002122&institutionId=2122&customerId=2120 - :service_type: getFullTxt :collection_name: Technology collection :coverage_statement: Available from 2006. :public_note: '' :from_nz: false :filtered: false :filter_reason: '' :direct_link: https://wisconsin-madison.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=49626697570002122&institutionId=2122&customerId=2120