Results Summary and Professional Abstract
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented, and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- Reviewers asked for additional information about when simulation studies were necessary in developing new methods for this study. The researchers explained that they found simulations were unnecessary for some of the algorithms because other methods like cross validation had been used or previous studies had used simulations, so the outcomes were well known. In addition, the researchers indicated that they did not have the time and resources to perform additional simulations given the extensive work on algorithm development.
- Reviewers asked the researchers to revise the report for this methods development project to make it easier to understand for a general-scientist audience. The researchers moved the more- technical sections into the appendix.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.