Examination of the scientific review process: Ten best practice
  suggestions for an improved process
  In this article we wish to provide a common set of best practice approaches
that should be considered for all effective research grant proposal reviews.
The federal government performs a critical role in American competitiveness and
security by supporting basic research funded with taxpayer dollars. Effectively
managing their allocation to scientists and researchers is a noble and crucial
mission for advancing fundamental knowledge and deserves a heightened
attention. Ensuring that proposals submitted are treated fairly and
transparently is essential to both the health of any research program and also
a duty to the public who ultimately funds the research.
  The paper describes the general requirements of a review process and at each
step underlines the issues and suggests potential improvements and some
fundamental requirements that should be included in any scientific review. We
also included a series of tips geared to the scientific community. Our goals in
this paper are 1) to demystify the process for everyone including policy makers
who are sometimes flummoxed by the results of some scientific reviews, 2) to
trigger some discussions about reviews and review process in the scientific
community, 3) to inform scientists whose careers are directly impacted by
review results about their own role in this process and 4) to suggest a road to
more efficient, fairer and overall more transparent process. For experts in
proposal reviews or for busy or impatient readers, the entire list of our
recommendations is presented at the beginning. We describe in each section the
context and rational of each recommendation.
