Peer Review Process

Rigorous peer review is the cornerstone of our funding programs. It ensures that we support research that meets the highest scientific standards, invests in BC’s best and brightest researchers, and builds our province’s capacity for world-class health research.

We adhere to six principles shared by all members of the National Alliance of Provincial Health Research Organizations (NAPHRO): integrity, accountability, transparency, balance, confidentiality and impartiality.

In line with these principles, our review cycles follow these steps:

Categorize applications by theme

Categorize applications by theme

Match reviewers to applications

Match reviewers to applications

Hold review panel meetings

Hold review panel meetings

Have three rounds of scoring

Have three rounds of scoring

Debrief with all reviewers

Debrief with all reviewers

As appropriate for specific funding programs, applications are categorized by theme (e.g. biomedical, clinical, health services and population health), with each theme having a corresponding review panel. The chairs and scientific officers of all review panels cross-check the groupings to ensure the research proposed within each application aligns with the panel it is assigned to.

Once the application deadline has passed, we recruit reviewers who are subject matter experts in areas that directly align with the applications we have received. These reviewers are selected for their research excellence, breadth of knowledge and maturity of judgment. We’ve been matching reviewers to applications based on expertise for 15 years, drawing on “external readers,” often from the international community, for highly specialized applications.

Review panel meetings take place in a virtual format. Each reviewer is encouraged to share unbiased feedback and discuss scoring for each application (excluding those with conflicts). Through this frank and open discussion, reviewers challenge and hold each other accountable for adjudication decisions.

For each application, two lead reviewers (chosen for their subject matter expertise) share their assessments and initial scores. The panel then discusses the application, and the lead reviewers can revise their scores after considering these additional insights. This creates a “consensus score” that forms the basis for the voting range. Finally, all panel members (excluding those with conflicts) score the application anonymously; the average of these scores is the final score for the application.

At the end of each review meeting, we invite reviewers to share feedback on the program, resources provided to applicants and review process. This ensures we continue to refine our programs and processes to ensure they are high quality and meet the highest scientific standards.

An overview of our typical peer review process

 

Our structured peer review process is tailored to meet the needs of each funding program. This visual overview shows the process for our Scholar Program.

click on image below to enlarge

Recent review panels

2023 Scholar competition

Learn more

2023 Research Trainee competition

Learn more

2022 Convening & Collaborating competition

Learn more

2022 Reach competition

Learn more

2022 Health Professional-Investigator (HP-I) competition

Learn more