What makes or breaks competitive research proposals? A mixed-methods analysis of research grant evaluation reports

Conditions that do or do not disadvantage interdisciplinary research proposals in project evaluation

(2022) Marco Seeber et al.   Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

On predicting research grants productivity via machine learning

(2022) Jorge A.V. Tohalino et al.   Journal of Informetrics

A retrospective analysis of the peer review of more than 75,000 Marie Curie proposals between 2007 and 2018

(2021) David G Pina et al.   eLife

Grant Review Feedback: Appropriateness and Usefulness

(2021) Stephen A. Gallo et al.   SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS

Effectiveness of research grants funded by European Research Council and Polish National Science Centre

(2021) Maciej Dzieżyc et al.   Journal of Informetrics

Automatically detecting open academic review praise and criticism

(2020) Mike Thelwall et al.   ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW

Large-scale language analysis of peer review reports

(2020) Ivan Buljan et al.   eLife

Research funding: past performance is a stronger predictor of future scientific output than reviewer scores

(2020) Balázs Győrffy et al.   Journal of Informetrics

Motivations for performing scholarly prepublication peer review: A scoping review

(2020) Mersiha Mahmić-Kaknjo et al.   Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance

Determining the informativeness of comments: a natural language study of F1000Research open peer review reports

(2020) Kianoosh Rashidi et al.   ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW

A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals

(2019) Ketevan Glonti et al.   BMC Medicine

A scoping review of simulation models of peer review

(2019) Thomas Feliciani et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study

(2019) Ketevan Glonti et al.   BMJ Open

A Game Theoretic Approach to Peer Review of Grant Proposals

(2019) Esra Eren Bayindir et al.   Journal of Informetrics

Fragments of peer review: A quantitative analysis of the literature (1969-2015)

(2018) Francisco Grimaldo et al.   PLoS One

Studying grant decision-making: a linguistic analysis of review reports

(2018) Peter van den Besselaar et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

Are Female Applicants Disadvantaged in National Institutes of Health Peer Review? Combining Algorithmic Text Mining and Qualitative Methods to Detect Evaluative Differences in R01 Reviewers' Critiques

(2017) Wairimu Magua et al.   JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH

Confounding and collinearity in regression analysis: a cautionary tale and an alternative procedure, illustrated by studies of British voting behaviour

(2017) Ron Johnston et al.   QUALITY & QUANTITY

Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review

(2017) Andrea C. Tricco et al.   PLoS One

A Quantitative Linguistic Analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 Application Critiques From Investigators at One Institution

(2015) Anna Kaatz et al.   ACADEMIC MEDICINE

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

(2015) David G. Pina et al.   PLoS One

Quantifying the quality of peer reviewers through Zipf’s law

(2015) Marcel Ausloos et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

The negativity bias: Conceptualization, quantification, and individual differences

(2014) John T. Cacioppo et al.   BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES

Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy

(2014) M. G. Morgan   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Closed versus open reviewing of journal manuscripts: how far do comments differ in language use?

(2011) Lutz Bornmann et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS