Reviewing Assigned Applications

 

• Each application is evaluated for scientific and technical merit according to the Scored Review Criteria, Additional Review Criteria, and Additional Review Considerations stated in the funding opportunity.
• Please note the difference between review criteria for research project grants and review criteria for training grants.
• What if I have seen this ‘new’ application before? NIH Policy on Resubmission Applications;  Resubmission FAQs

Specific Resources

• Overall Impact vs Significance

• Scored Review Criteria
  • Review Criteria at a Glance*
  • Reviewer Guidance on Rigor and Transparency (03/15/2019)
  • Reviewer Guidance to Evaluate Sex as a Biological Variable 
• Additional Review Criteria
  • Worksheet for Review of VAS   Note: Justification for the number of animals is an element of rigor in the experimental design and should be described in the Research Strategy.  Applicants must state only the total number of animals proposed in the VAS. Please see VAS FAQs for additional information.
  • Review of the Human Subjects Section​ (03/15/2019)
    • Revised Definition of Clinical Trials
    • Clinical Trial Decision Tree
    • Summary of Single IRB Guidance for multi-site studies 
  • Review of Inclusion on the Basis of Sex/Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Age in Clinical Research (03/15/2019)
  • Review of Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells
  • Review of Revision Applications
• Additional Reviewer Considerations
  • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources (See Page 2)
  • Review of Budget Information
  • Information on Select Agents
  • Information on Resource Sharing Plans

General Resources

• NIH Reviewer Orientation (Provides more detailed information on each of the topics listed above - see Contents, page 1)
• ​Scoring Guidance
• Guidance for the review of clinical trial applications
• NIH Rigor and Transparency
• ​Pre-meeting Do’s and Don’ts

*NOTE: These are the standard review criteria. For meeting-specific information, check with the SRO.