Old Bones
Senior Member
- Messages
- 808
From the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) website:
Scientists win peer rebellion, face-to-face review is restored
Emergency meeting restores gold standard of review for scientific projects
For the complete article:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/health-biomedical-scientist-peer-review-cihr-summit-1.3678091
First, here are selected excerpts regarding the good news:
"It was a win for Canada's health scientists Wednesday as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research agreed to restore the face-to-face system of peer review.
"I'm cautiously optimistic," said Jim Woodgett, research director at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute in Toronto,"but the devil is in the details."
Woodgett was a leading voice in the uprising over changes in the way Ottawa distributes its funding for health and biomedical research.
Instead of bringing scientists together to discuss proposals submitted by their colleagues, to choose the best ideas, the CIHR tried to implement a virtual review where individual scientists evaluated proposals in isolation, ranked them by computer and made comments online, then waited to see if anyone in the virtual group responded.
Within days, an open letter to Health Minister Jane Philpott began circulating, demanding a halt to the changes. The letter was quickly signed by almost 1,300 scientists, including some of Canada' s most prominent researchers.
Philpott ordered the CIHR to convene an emergency summit to try to resolve the problems before the next round of funding begins in September. So 50 scientists were hastily invited to Ottawa for what was dubbed the CIHR Summit."
Now, the bad news:
"Many of the scientists are not celebrating, as they brace themselves for grim news on Friday when the results of the current round of funding are announced. The CIHR has revealed that only 13 per cent of the scientists applying for money will be successful."
With respect to the lack of research funding for ME in Canada, it seems we will be in good company.
Scientists win peer rebellion, face-to-face review is restored
Emergency meeting restores gold standard of review for scientific projects
For the complete article:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/health-biomedical-scientist-peer-review-cihr-summit-1.3678091
First, here are selected excerpts regarding the good news:
"It was a win for Canada's health scientists Wednesday as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research agreed to restore the face-to-face system of peer review.
"I'm cautiously optimistic," said Jim Woodgett, research director at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute in Toronto,"but the devil is in the details."
Woodgett was a leading voice in the uprising over changes in the way Ottawa distributes its funding for health and biomedical research.
Instead of bringing scientists together to discuss proposals submitted by their colleagues, to choose the best ideas, the CIHR tried to implement a virtual review where individual scientists evaluated proposals in isolation, ranked them by computer and made comments online, then waited to see if anyone in the virtual group responded.
Within days, an open letter to Health Minister Jane Philpott began circulating, demanding a halt to the changes. The letter was quickly signed by almost 1,300 scientists, including some of Canada' s most prominent researchers.
Philpott ordered the CIHR to convene an emergency summit to try to resolve the problems before the next round of funding begins in September. So 50 scientists were hastily invited to Ottawa for what was dubbed the CIHR Summit."
Now, the bad news:
"Many of the scientists are not celebrating, as they brace themselves for grim news on Friday when the results of the current round of funding are announced. The CIHR has revealed that only 13 per cent of the scientists applying for money will be successful."
With respect to the lack of research funding for ME in Canada, it seems we will be in good company.
