Suppr超能文献

同行评议在评估生物医学研究资助中的实践:美国心脏协会的科学声明。

Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

出版信息

Circ Res. 2017 Aug 4;121(4):e9-e19. doi: 10.1161/RES.0000000000000158. Epub 2017 Jul 6.

Abstract

The biomedical research enterprise depends on the fair and objective peer review of research grants, leading to the distribution of resources through efficient and robust competitive methods. In the United States, federal funding agencies and foundations collectively distribute billions of dollars annually to support biomedical research. For the American Heart Association, a Peer Review Subcommittee is charged with establishing the highest standards for peer review. This scientific statement reviews the current literature on peer review practices, describes the current American Heart Association peer review process and those of other agencies, analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of American Heart Association peer review practices, and recommends best practices for the future.

摘要

生物医学研究企业依赖于公正客观的研究资助同行评议,通过高效和稳健的竞争方法分配资源。在美国,联邦资助机构和基金会每年共同分发数十亿美元用于支持生物医学研究。对于美国心脏协会来说,一个同行评议小组委员会负责制定同行评议的最高标准。本科学声明审查了同行评议实践的现有文献,描述了美国心脏协会当前的同行评议过程和其他机构的同行评议过程,分析了美国心脏协会同行评议实践的优缺点,并为未来推荐了最佳实践。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验