The Hatch-Waxman Act, Post-Grant Review, and the PTAB: A New Sort of Competition

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Sturiale
Keyword(s):  
Grant Review

Subjective influences in the grant review process

1986 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 726-727
Author(s):  
RS Mackenzie ◽  
RE Martin
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Grant Review

Luck, lotteries, and loopholes of grant review

The Lancet ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 348 (9037) ◽  
pp. 1255-1256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Horton
Keyword(s):  
Grant Review

scholarly journals How to get and keep your lab funded

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 2519-2521
Author(s):  
Jonathan Chernoff
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Decisive Factor ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Grant Review

Much has been written about the seemingly capricious manner by which grant proposals are ranked and awarded by the National Institutes of Health and similar agencies, yet some scientists are able to maintain stable funding over long periods of time. While raw luck may certainly play a role in this process, particularly when paylines are tight, it is also possible that skill—in the art of grant writing at least—could represent a decisive factor. Here, I submit that, even as we attempt to reform and one day perfect the grant review process, there are actions that applicants can take today to get better results from the system we have.

Peer review of nursing research proposals

1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
RD Lindquist ◽  
MF Tracy ◽  
D Treat-Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Nursing Research ◽  
Review Panel ◽  
Research Grants ◽  
Review Session ◽  
Grant Review ◽  
Selection Of

The grant review process that operationalizes peer review for the critique, scoring, approval, and selection of research grants for funding may intimidate a novice reviewer. This article describes the peer review panel and process of grant review, specifies the role and responsibilities of the reviewer in the review session, and presents considerations for the evaluation of proposals and the preparation of a written critique. A sample critique is provided.

scholarly journals American Idol and NIH Grant Review—Redux

Cell ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 127 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-662
Author(s):  
Karl Munger
Keyword(s):  
American Idol ◽  
Grant Review

scholarly journals American Idol and NIH Grant Review

Cell ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 126 (4) ◽  
pp. 637-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Pagano
Keyword(s):  
American Idol ◽  
Grant Review

Bicameral Grant Review: An Alternative to Conventional Peer Review

1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 2313-2313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald R. Forsdyke
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Grant Review

Post-Grant Review: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly for Biotechnology Companies

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Smitha Uthaman ◽  
Deborah Lu ◽  
Thomas Kowalski
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Biotechnology Companies ◽  
The Many ◽  
Grant Review

This paper summarizes the Post-Grant Review process, one of the many interesting aspects of patent reform brought about by the enactment of the America Invents Act, and the effect it may have on how Biotechnology companies conduct business and manage their intellectual property.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document