The authors present some of the criticisms that have been leveled
against the federal peer review system of approving or disapproving
monetary grants. They then summarize the process used by the National
Institute of Mental Health's Psychiatry Education Branch to judge grant
applications, focusing on the disposition of 527 applications reviewed in
November 1974-January 1975. They found that the wide distribution of the
reviewers by geography, subspecialty, experience, sex, and ethnicity, plus
the steps taken to guard against bias and ensure fairness, were effective,
refuting many of the criticisms of the group peer review process.Abstract Teaser