Yale University

Don't play the odds - Peer Review your products!

This year, your NIH grant application will compete with around 80,000 others being considered by some 20,000 scientific reviewers. Your grant will be strong, but there’s always room to make it stronger.

For planning purposes, it’s time to let CIRA know if you expect to submit a grant proposal or manuscript to CIRA’s Peer Review program between now and May 2012. We’ll also be happy to accept poster or short conference presentations for review. For those interested, please send the following to gai.doran@yale.edu.

  • a title,
  • a brief description,
  • suggestions for reviewers,
  • the approximate date you would want the peer review done (remember that we need the submission a week before that date),
  • and for a grant, the type of grant (e.g., R01, R03, K etc).

By way of further background for new Affiliates, the Center's Peer Review Program is designed to enhance the quality of grant proposals, manuscripts, and poster and conference presentations by sharing them with a multidisciplinary group of colleagues. The spirit of our program is one of collegiality and respect; it is constructive rather than evaluative in nature. For new research and training projects that primary investigators (PIs) anticipate affiliating with CIRA, peer review is an ideal way to receive one-stop consultation from CIRA’s Clinical and Health Services Research (CHSR), Interdisciplinary Research Methods (IRM), Law, Policy and Ethics (LPE) and Community research (CR) Cores. Investigators are free to use the feedback they receive as they see fit. We encourage peer review at an early stage of a project's development; even a 2-3 page concept paper is appropriate for peer review. At least two sessions are scheduled per month, with ad hoc sessions convened as necessary (we sometimes run email-only reviews for short manuscripts or when deadlines are pressing). Sessions take place at CIRA's offices at 135 College Street, New Haven, and last around 1.5 hours, with two proposals typically reviewed per session. Each review is led by a primary reviewer, whose role is to provide oral and written feedback on each proposal.   



Published: Monday, January 23, 2012