Evaluation of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs Review Process (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Programmatic Review
6 Programmatic Review
Pages 91-98
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 91... ...
The program manager also completes a review of the administrative notes from the peer review meeting, provides input on ad hoc reviewer recruitment, manages potential conflicts of interest (COIs) , and finishes any verification of application eligibility or other issues identified at peer review (Salzer, 2016b)
|
From page 92... ...
Both reviewers for a particular application make a preliminary determination prior to the plenary meeting on whether that application should be recommended for funding. As with the vision setting process, before the programmatic review meeting, the program manager and the contractor may schedule a teleconference with the panel chair to discuss the programmatic processes, award mechanisms, and any other program specific issues, such as conflicts of interest.
|
From page 93... ...
Programmatic reviews focus primarily on the following criteria: • Peer review scores and summary evaluations of the applications, and • Relevance to the mission of the Defense Health Program and the annual requirements for the specific research program, including the following subcriteria: o Program portfolio composition, o Relative impact and innovation, o Adherence to the intent of the award mechanism, and o P rogrammatic relevance in relation to the research program's overarching challenges and focus areas (if applicable)
|
From page 94... ...
The discussion of the applications begins with those that have been assigned to primary and secondary reviewers. The program manager sets the "assigned for discussion" range for programmatic review based on the results of peer review scores, topic areas, focus areas, and other key elements specific to the program.
|
From page 95... ...
After all assigned submissions have been discussed, the panel chair invites members to champion any applications that had lower peer review scores, but which may be programmatically relevant for another reason. The panel then prioritizes the applications for funding and the chair, with contractor support, makes a list of applications recommended for funding, and a list of alternate applications that might be considered for funding if money becomes available or applications on the recommended list are not funded for any reason.
|
From page 96... ...
For funded applications, the snippet may state an issue or a contingency for award, such as the inclusion of a statistical plan or a data monitor. For not-funded applications, particularly for those that received a high peer review score, the snippet may explain why the programmatic panel recommended that the application not be funded, such as it did not meet the intent of the award mechanism, there were concerns for portfolio balance, or the application did not meet programmatic relevance.
|
From page 97... ...
. The CDMRP program manager may also coordinate with the contractor on feedback regarding the programmatic panel members' academic level or equivalent position, expertise, ability to communicate ideas and rationale, interaction in a group setting, and ability to debate and present an opposing view in a professional manner.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.