Public Comments - Submissions

Peer Review Process Comments

Name of person or organization submitting comments: Janine Chiappa McKenna

Please identify which stakeholder group you represent: Patient

Registration at ClinicalTrials.gov, RoPR, or PROSPERO

Production of a draft final report, scientific abstract, and standalone results table

PCORI peer review process of the draft final report

1. Will there be an IRB requirement for the awarding institution?

2. Would PCORI allow PIs to "take" reviews to a publication, thereby reducing the work of the journal editor in finding reviewers, waiting for the review, etc.?

3. Will PCORI impose a limit on the number of re-analyses of research?

4. What about faulty data? Will the reviewers do anything beyond requesting a revison of the final draft report?

Providing a version of the results summary that will be useful and comprehensible for use by patients and the general public

Submission of results table to ClinicalTrials.gov and/or other sites as appropriate, with a link to the abstract and standalone results table on PCORI’s website

Public posting of full final reports on PCORI’s website

Awardee institution notification to PCORI of submission to journals and subsequent publication of papers resulting from funded projects

Timeline of the proposed peer review and public release process

Please rate how well the proposal meets PCORI’s obligations under its authorizing legislation Very Well

Please add any comment about your rating:

Please rate how well the proposal provides a clear understanding of the peer review and public release process Somewhat Clear

Please add any comment about your rating:

Please comment on the proposal’s feasibility given any competing obligations that awardee institutions funded by PCORI, or their investigators, may face.

The law requires that PCORI both conduct peer review of our funded primary research and make it available publicly within a specific timeframe. We propose to conduct peer review first, then post the results, so they can benefit from the review process. Do you agree or disagree with the sequencing of this process? Strongly Agree

Please add any comment about your rating:

Please provide any additional comments that you have not already provided about any aspect of this proposal.

Upload a Document