91丝瓜视频

Sam Harper and Arijit Nandi have received funding to help strengthen national capacity in metaresearch through the , supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and Michael Smith Health Research BC (MSHRBC).

Harper is a professor in the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, and Nandi is jointly appointed in the Department of Equity, Ethics and Policy, and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health.

SSHRC, CIHR, and MSHRBC have awarded $2.7 million to 14 research teams across Canada over three years, including $192,017 to Harper and Nandi. The initiative aims to strengthen Canada鈥檚 capacity in metaresearch鈥攖he use of rigorous methods to study and improve research practices, standards, and evaluation.

The Research-on-Research initiative supports projects that generate evidence to improve research systems and funding practices, train students and early-career researchers, and mobilize findings nationally and internationally.

Harper and Nandi鈥檚 project will investigate how the peer review process used by CIHR for Project Grant applications affects the fairness and reliability of health research funding decisions, focusing on how differences in application scores emerge over the course of panel discussion.

Peer review panels typically assign a small number of reviewers to read each application thoroughly, after which the full committee discusses the proposal and assigns final scores. Using CIHR application-level data, the research team will quantify how scores change between these stages, and assess how reviewer expertise, engagement with the application, and gender influence outcomes, particularly for applications from early-career and underrepresented applicants.

This research addresses longstanding concerns that group discussions, while valuable for clarifying strengths and weaknesses, may also introduce bias when many panel members have not read the application closely.

The team will also we will evaluate alternative evaluation methods, such as weighting the scores of reviewers who read the application more carefully or introducing partial randomization for borderline cases, to determine whether these approaches might lead to more reliable and equitable funding decisions.

Ultimately, the study aims to generate evidence that can strengthen the fairness of CIHR鈥檚 peer review system. while providing reproducible research practices for trainees, and materials including policy briefs that can support a more equitable and rigorous funding process for Canadian health research.

听

听