Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 9, 2026
05:30
Mouse Eye Enucleation for Remote High-throughput Phenotyping
Published on: November 19, 2011
21.0K
Rethinking (un)blinding in biomedical proposal peer review: A multi-stakeholder qualitative study
Seba Qussini1,2, Farizah Mezer Anami2, Kris Dierickx1
1Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Accountability in Research
|December 7, 2025
Summary
Stakeholders desire more transparency in grant funding. Open peer review (OPR) offers a viable path to enhance accountability in proposal reviews, despite preferences for blinded systems.
Area of Science:
- Biomedical research funding
- Grant proposal evaluation
- Scientific peer review
Background:
- Peer review processes for grant proposals face criticism and require further investigation.
- Stakeholders' views on reviewer blinding and open peer review (OPR) in biomedical proposals are explored.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate stakeholder perspectives on reviewer blinding in grant proposal peer review.
- To assess the implications of open peer review (OPR) for biomedical grant proposals.
Main Methods:
- A qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews with 23 participants from funding agencies in Belgium and Qatar.
- Thematic framework analysis guided the examination of transcribed interviews, supplemented by quantitative ratings on peer review statements.
Main Results:
- Three key themes emerged: prioritizing transparency in fund allocation while protecting reviewer anonymity.
- Open peer review (OPR) is perceived as a practical method to improve transparency and accountability in proposal reviews.
- A critical perspective on traditional peer review systems is increasingly evident among stakeholders.
Conclusions:
- Despite a preference for double-blinded review, its limitations are apparent, especially amid funding challenges.
- There is a recognized need for enhanced openness and transparency in the peer review of grant proposals and fund allocation processes.
Keywords:
(un)blindingProposals’ peer reviewopen peer reviewopen science movementqualitative researchMore Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
12.5K
05:34Operating and Biocontainment Procedures of a Facility for Laboratory Mice with a Natural Microbiome: Immunophenotyping Procedure
Published on: December 13, 2024
1.0K
Related Concept Videos
01:11Blinding
3.8K
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
3.8K
02:07Blind Procedures
12.8K
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
12.8K
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
382
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
382
01:56Ethics in Research
25.4K
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
25.4K
01:27Halo Effect
370
The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
370
01:15Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
135
Bioavailability studies are essential for evaluating a drug's therapeutic efficacy and understanding its absorption patterns under various physiological conditions. Conducting such studies on target patient populations provides more relevant data by simulating real-world disease states. However, practical challenges often necessitate the use of young, healthy adult volunteers as study subjects.Patients may exhibit altered drug absorption patterns due to the effects of the disease itself,...
135