It’s time to rethink peer review policies—and consider an “Earth Shot Program”

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

At a recent NIH study section that I chaired, we had many applications that we reviewed as a group before the meeting. At the meeting, we were required to discuss over 50% of the grants.

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe
Wafik S. El-Deiry, MD, PhD, FACP
Director, Joint Program in Cancer Biology, Brown University and Lifespan Cancer Institute
Associate Dean, Oncologic Sciences, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University
American Cancer Society Research Professor

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

I write a weekly blog for Georgetown University’s Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center community. Here I share an updated version of a blog post I wrote in September 2024, now supplemented by some poems I have written over the years that inspired paintings by my wife Harriet Weiner, who is a much better artist than I am a poet or writer. 
The Government Accountability Office, an independent, non-partisan congressional watchdog agency, found that NIH violated the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 when it cancelled nearly 2,000 research grants in an effort to comply with several of President Donald Trump’s executive orders, including “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing” (The Cancer Letter, Jan 24, 2025).
Wafik S. El-Deiry, MD, PhD, FACP
Director, Joint Program in Cancer Biology, Brown University and Lifespan Cancer Institute
Associate Dean, Oncologic Sciences, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University
American Cancer Society Research Professor

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login