Author: National Institutes of Health (U.S.)Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Federal aid to medical research
Languages : en
Pages : 26
Book Description
Decisions by Director, NIH, on Recommendations of Grants Peer Review Study Team
Author: National Institutes of Health (U.S.)Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Federal aid to medical research
Languages : en
Pages : 26
Book Description
Compendium of HHS Evaluation Studies
Author: HHS Evaluation Documentation Center (U.S.)Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Evaluation research (Social action programs)
Languages : en
Pages : 856
Book Description
Compendium of HHS Evaluations and Relevant Other Studies
Author: HHS Evaluation Documentation Center (U.S.)Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Evaluation research (Social action programs)
Languages : en
Pages : 942
Book Description
Compendium of HEW Evaluation Studies
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Evaluation research (Social action programs)
Languages : en
Pages : 714
Book Description
Grants Peer Review
Author: Grants Peer Review
Author: NIH Peer Grants Review Study Team (U.S.).Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Medicine
Languages : en
Pages : 260
Book Description
Returning Individual Research Results to Participants
Author: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and MedicinePublisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309475201
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 399
Book Description
When is it appropriate to return individual research results to participants? The immense interest in this question has been fostered by the growing movement toward greater transparency and participant engagement in the research enterprise. Yet, the risks of returning individual research resultsâ€"such as results with unknown validityâ€"and the associated burdens on the research enterprise are competing considerations. Returning Individual Research Results to Participants reviews the current evidence on the benefits, harms, and costs of returning individual research results, while also considering the ethical, social, operational, and regulatory aspects of the practice. This report includes 12 recommendations directed to various stakeholdersâ€"investigators, sponsors, research institutions, institutional review boards (IRBs), regulators, and participantsâ€"and are designed to help (1) support decision making regarding the return of results on a study-by-study basis, (2) promote high-quality individual research results, (3) foster participant understanding of individual research results, and (4) revise and harmonize current regulations.
NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts
Author: NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts
Author: National Institutes of Health (U.S.)Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Research grants
Languages : en
Pages : 536
Book Description
Evaluation of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs Review Process
Author: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and MedicinePublisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309450047
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 165
Book Description
The medical research landscape in the United States is supported by a variety of organizations that spend billions of dollars in government and private funds each year to seek answers to complex medical and public health problems. The largest government funder is the National Institutes of Health (NIH), followed by the Department of Defense (DoD). Almost half of DoD's medical research funding is administered by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP). The mission of CDMRP is to foster innovative approaches to medical research in response to the needs of its stakeholdersâ€"the U.S. military, their families, the American public, and Congress. CDMRP funds medical research to be performed by other government and nongovernmental organizations, but it does not conduct research itself. The major focus of CDMRP funded research is the improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases, injuries, or conditions that affect service members and their families, and the general public. The hallmarks of CDMRP include reviewing applications for research funding using a two-tiered review process, and involving consumers throughout the process. Evaluation of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs Review Process evaluates the CDMRP two-tiered peer review process, its coordination of research priorities with NIH and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and provides recommendations on how the process for reviewing and selecting studies can be improved.