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.
Reviewers’ comments and the investigator’s changes in response included the following:
- The awardee provided more information about the Data Quality Collaborative (DQC) and its work in identifying key data quality recommendations.
- Based on reviewer recommendations, the awardee highlighted key study results involving harmonized data quality terms and recommendations by reorganizing the report by the three distinct categories of study findings.
- The reviewers requested that the investigator clarify the description of the factor analyses completed on the survey data, including replacing a more-technical table with a more-intuitive figure.
- The awardee added a discussion of the relevance and potential impact of this study on patient-centered outcomes research. The results improved the ability to assess data quality of a specific data set.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.