1. NIH Study Section Review Process
Paul Jacobsen, PhD; Associate Director Healthcare Delivery Research Program, NCI
Hazel Nichols, PhD; Assistant Professor, Department of Epidemiology, UNC

2. Shriver National Institute
National Institutes of Health
National Institute
on Alcohol Abuse
and Alcoholism
of Arthritis and
Musculoskeletal
and Skin Diseases
National Cancer
Institute
on Drug Abuse
of Environmental
Health Sciences
on Aging
Eunice Kennedy
Shriver National Institute
of Child Health and
Human Development
National Institute on
Deafness and Other
Communication
Disorders
National Eye
National Human
Genome Research
of Mental Health
of Neurological
Disorders and
Stroke
of General
Medical Sciences
of Nursing Research
National Library
of Medicine
Center for
Scientific Review
National Center
for Complementary
and Alternative
Medicine
of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases
John E. Fogarty
International
Center
for Research
Resources
Clinical Center
Minority Health and
Health Disparities
National Institute of
Biomedical Imaging
and Bioengineering
Office of the Director
Information
Technology
National Heart,
Lung, and Blood
of Dental and
Craniofacial
Research
of Diabetes and
Digestive and
Kidney Diseases
NIH is the largest source of funding for medical research in the world, creating hundreds of thousands of high-quality jobs by funding thousands of scientists in universities and research institutions in every state across America and around the globe.
NIH is made up of 27 Institutes and Centers, each with a specific research agenda, often focusing on particular diseases or body systems.
More than 80% of the NIH's budget goes to more than 300,000 research personnel at over 3,000 universities and research institutions. In addition, about 6,000 scientists work in NIH’s own laboratories, most of which are on the NIH main campus in Bethesda, Maryland. The main campus is also home to the NIH Clinical Center, the largest hospital in the world totally dedicated to clinical research. 2

3. NIH Grant Process Investigator Grantee Institution NIH
Initiates Research Idea and Prepares Application
Conducts Research
Investigator
Submits Application
Manages Funds
Grantee Institution
NIH
Center for Scientific Review (CSR) Assigns to Scientific Review Group (SRG) and Institute
Institute Makes Funding Selections & Issues Grant Awards
SRG Evaluates for Scientific Merit
Institute Evaluates for Program Relevance and Need
National Advisory Council/Board Recommends Action

4. NIH Funding Mechanisms
Academic Career Award (K07)
Mentored Clinical Scientist
Short-Term Training (T35)
Development Award (K08)
Small Business Grants (R41, R42, R43, R44)
Conference Grant (R13)
Marc Fellowships (F34, F36, T34)
Academic Research Enhancement Award (R15)
Minority Biomedical Support Grant (S06)
Biomedical Research Support Shared Instrumentation Grant (S10)
Resource Grant (P40, P41, R24, R26, R28)
Research Project Grant (R01)
Developmental/Exploratory Grant (R21)
Small Grant (R03)
Program Project Grant (P01)
Predoctoral Fellowship (F31)
Postdoctoral Fellowship (F32)
Center Grant (P30, P50, P60)
Senior Fellowship (F32)
Institutional Fellowship (T32)
Fogarty International Center Fellowship (F05, F06)
Research Scientist Development (K01)
Pathway to Independence (K99/R01)

5. Understanding
NIH Peer Review

6. WHAT HAPPENS IN A STUDY SECTION MEETING?
Closed to the public (Program officials may observe)
Orientation
Conflict of interest
Developments of interest to the study section
Changes in policy or procedure
Introduction of persons present
Role of persons present
Applications reviewed in ascending order of
mean initial impact score (best to worst), until
about 50% are scored. The rest are unscored.
Application by application discussion
Persons with conflicts of interest excused
Assigned reviewers give preliminary scores
Discussion of application’s scientific and technical merit
Assigned reviewers first, then other members
Range of scores
Every member scores every application
Assignment of gender, minority, and children codes,
human subjects codes; recommended changes to budget
Video

7. Review Criteria
Significance: Does the study address an important problem? How will scientific knowledge be advanced?
Investigator: Is the investigator qualified?
Innovation: Are there novel concepts or approaches? Are the aims original and innovative?
Approach: Are design and methods well-developed and appropriate? Are problem areas addressed?
Environment: Does the scientific environment contribute to the probability of success? Are there unique features of the scientific environment?
Overall Impact: Assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved

8. Scoring Scale Happy Days are Here Again! Pop the Bubbly!
Cautious Optimism
Borderline. In striking distance for resubmission.
Not very good.
Pretty Bad.
Awful.
Oh, the Humanity!

13. New Guidelines to Enhance Rigor and Transparency
Scientific premise
Scientific rigor
Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources

14. Rigor and Transparency
Scientific premise
State the strengths and weaknesses of published research or preliminary data crucial to your application
Scientific rigor
Describe how your experimental design and methods will achieve robust and unbiased results

15. Rigor and Transparency
Scientific premise
Scientific rigor
Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables
Vertebrate animal and human studies
Explain how biological variables are factored into research design and provide justification if only one sex is used

16. Does the study
Involve vertebrate
animals or
humans?

17. Rigor and Transparency
Scientific premise
Scientific rigor
Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources
Includes, but not limited to, cell lines, specialty chemicals, antibodies, non-standard laboratory reagents.
Discussed after scoring

18. Calculations
Priority Score: Mean of all reviewers’ Overall Impact scores X 10, rounded to whole number.
Percentile: Percentile rank of application compared to the pool of the last three review cycles of that study section. (Low percentiles are better.)

19. Summary Statement
After the review meeting is finished, the results are documented by the SRA in a summary statement and forwarded to the PI and to the assigned NIH Institute. The assigned NIH Institute is responsible for making a funding decision.
The summary statement contains:
Overall Resume and Summary of Review Discussion
Essentially Unedited Critiques of Assigned Reviewers, including their scores in the 5 categories
Priority Score and Percentile Ranking
Budget Recommendations
Administrative Notes

20. What Determines Which Awards Are Made?
Scientific
Merit
Program
Considerations
Availability
of Funds

21. A little vocabulary Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOA)
Program Announcement (PA)
Indicates that the institute would like to fund research in this area, but you must go through the regular application process. There are two special types of PAs:
PAR—applications are reviewed by an Institute or a special Center for Scientific Review committee
PAS—PA with set-aside funds.
Request for Applications (RFA)
Indicates that the institute has set aside funds for research in this area. May have a special due date and study section.
Investigator Initiated Application
Not in response to specific PA or RFA.
That’s OK, use general, omnibus PA.

22. NIH Early Career Reviewer Program
Goals
Develop qualified scientists without prior CSR experience into well-trained reviewers
Help emerging researchers advance their career by exposing them to a peer review experience to make them more competitive applicants
Enrich the pool of NIH reviewers by including those from less research-intensive institutions

23. NIH Early Career Reviewer Program
To Qualify
2 years as a faculty member or similar researcher role. Postdocs are not eligible.
Evidence of an active research program.
At least 2 senior author (first, last, single, or corresponding) research papers in the last 2 years.
Have not served on a CSR study section.
Current funding not required.

24. NIH Early Career Reviewer Program
To Apply
Full CV in word or as pdf
NIH Commons ID
Select 4 CSR Study sections

25. Questions?
Acknowledgements
Heidi Sahel
Cheryl Thompson
Thomas Brandon