An experimental test of the effects of redacting grant applicant identifiers on peer review outcomes.

Background: Blinding reviewers to applicant identity has been proposed to reduce bias in peer review.

Methods: This experimental test used 1200 NIH grant applications, 400 from Black investigators, 400 matched applications from White investigators, and 400 randomly selected applications from White investigators. Applications were reviewed by mail in standard and redacted formats.

NIH peer review: Criterion scores completely account for racial disparities in overall impact scores.

Previous research has found that funding disparities are driven by applications' final impact scores and that only a portion of the black/white funding gap can be explained by bibliometrics and topic choice. Using National Institutes of Health R01 applications for council years 2014-2016, we examine assigned reviewers' preliminary overall impact and criterion scores to evaluate whether racial disparities in impact scores can be explained by application and applicant characteristics. We hypothesize that differences in commensuration-the process of combining criterion scores into overall impact scores-disadvantage black applicants.

NIH Peer Review: Scored Review Criteria and Overall Impact.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. Funding decisions are made largely based on the outcome of a peer review process that is intended to provide a fair, equitable, timely, and unbiased review of the quality, scientific merit, and potential impact of the research. There have been concerns about the criteria reviewers are using, and recent changes in review procedures at the NIH now make it possible to conduct an analysis of how reviewers evaluate applications for funding.

Characterization of the peer review network at the Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. This funding is largely effected through a competitive grants process. Each year the Center for Scientific Review (CSR) at NIH manages the evaluation, by peer review, of more than 55,000 grant applications.

Listening to classical music ameliorates unilateral neglect after stroke.

OBJECTIVE. We determined whether listening to excerpts of classical music ameliorates unilateral neglect (UN) in stroke patients. METHOD.

Effects of listening to pleasant music on chronic unilateral neglect: a single-subject study.

Recent studies suggest that the positive emotion induced by pleasant music may improve cognitive functions. We used the single-subject design to study whether listening to preferred music may reduce unilateral neglect in two participants with post-stroke neglect. These participants were instructed to listen to their preferred music every day for 5 weeks, followed by 2 weeks of follow-up assessment.

Pleasant music improves visual attention in patients with unilateral neglect after stroke.

Objective: To investigate whether listening to pleasant music improves visual attention to and awareness of contralesional stimuli in patients with unilateral neglect after stroke.

Methods: A within-subject design was used with 19 participants with unilateral neglect following a right hemisphere stroke. Participants were tested in three conditions (pleasant music, unpleasant music and white noise) within 1 week.

Stress, personal characteristics and burnout among first postgraduate year residents: a nationwide study in Taiwan.

Background: Many studies have recognized that the first postgraduate year (PGY-1) of residency training is the most stressful year. Failing to cope with the stress will have negative impact on their work performance and the quality of patient care.

Aims: To investigate stress and burnout in first postgraduate year (PGY-1) residents and to explore the relationship among stress, personal characteristics and burnout.