An examination of the federal psychiatric training grant peer review process

Abstract

The authors present some of the criticisms that have been leveled against the federal peer review system of approving or disapproving monetary grants. They then summarize the process used by the National Institute of Mental Health's Psychiatry Education Branch to judge grant applications, focusing on the disposition of 527 applications reviewed in November 1974-January 1975. They found that the wide distribution of the reviewers by geography, subspecialty, experience, sex, and ethnicity, plus the steps taken to guard against bias and ensure fairness, were effective, refuting many of the criticisms of the group peer review process.