Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Statistical analyses raise questions over NIH grant reviews

  • Prospects
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gene Russo is editor of Naturejobs.,

    Gene Russo

Authors
  1. Gene Russo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Related links

Related links

Related links in Nature Research

NIH responds to critics on peer review

Stats reveal bias in NIH grant review

Clinical trialists less likely to seek grant renewals

Related external links

“Why Are Peer Review Outcomes Less Favorable for Clinical Science than for Basic Science Grant Applications?” American Medical Journal

“Statistical analysis of the National Institutes of Health peer review system,” Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Russo, G. Statistical analyses raise questions over NIH grant reviews. Nature 454, 801 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7205-801a

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7205-801a

  • Springer Nature Limited

Search

Navigation