Peer Review Evaluation Process of Marie Curie Actions under EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research

Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?

(2015) D. Li et al.   SCIENCE

Study Design, Publication Outcome, and Funding of Research Presented at International Congresses on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication

(2014) Mario Malicki et al.   JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

Substantial Agreement of Referee Recommendations at a General Medical Journal – A Peer Review Evaluation at Deutsches Ärzteblatt International

(2013) Christopher Baethge et al.   PLoS One

Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes

(2013) Stephen A. Gallo et al.   PLoS One

The “study” role of past National Institutes of Health study sections

(2012) Thoru Pederson   MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF THE CELL

Peer Review of Grant Applications: Criteria Used and Qualitative Study of Reviewer Practices

(2012) Hendy Abdoul et al.   PLoS One

Heterogeneity of Inter-Rater Reliabilities of Grant Peer Reviews and Its Determinants: A General Estimating Equations Approach

(2012) Rüdiger Mutz et al.   PLoS One

Panel discussion does not improve reliability of peer review for medical research grant proposals

(2011) Mikael Fogelholm et al.   JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Peer Review of Grant Applications: A Simple Method to Identify Proposals with Discordant Reviews

(2011) Bruno Giraudeau et al.   PLoS One

An Analysis of Preliminary and Post-Discussion Priority Scores for Grant Applications Peer Reviewed by the Center for Scientific Review at the NIH

(2010) Michael R. Martin et al.   PLoS One

Statistical analysis of the National Institutes of Health peer review system

(2008) V. E. Johnson   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA