Peer reviewers do actually identify valuable research for funding

It is the best of times, it is the worst of times...today's researcher might say. Technology allows for advanced experiments to rapidly provide large datasets to answer questions that were unanswerable a generation ago. The downside is, that research like this is expensive, there are many more researchers to compete with today, and the budget has not kept up with the growth of the researcher pool competing for funding dollars. Right now, approximately only 16% of grants submitted for federal funding actually get selected for funding. As such, many good grants do not make the cut. 

A long-standing question has been whether federal funding is really going to the research most likely to have an impact in the field, and not just to those who have big labs, a successful history, and work at well known institutions.  What tis question is really asking is, "Does peer review succeed in selecting grants for funding the most impactful research?" Well, until recently science of all things did not have a good answer to this question.  However, a recent study by Li and Agha reported in Science showed that peer reviewers for grants actually do a good job in picking impactful projects, as indicated by publications, patents and other measurable outcomes. 

I recommend to those interested in a very understandable explanation of how grants get selected for funding, and what this research identified to read the attached article in ScienceNews. It is quite insightful, and provides confidence that the system really is working to fund the best research in the various fields of scientific research. The link to the abstract for the actual study published in Science is provided below. On a side note, I think the title is both appropriate and funny for the ScienceNews summary editorial.

Bethany Brookshire. A peer-reviewed study finds value in peer-reviewed research. Science News. April 23rd, 2015.
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/peer-reviewed-study-finds-value-peer-reviewed-research?tgt=nr

Danielle Li, Leila Agha (2015) Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals? Science, Vol. 348 no. 6233 pp. 434-438. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa0185. 
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/348/6233/434.full

#science   #research   #peerreview   #grants   #sciencenews