An Inside Look at NIH Peer Review

Reading time: 1 – 2 minutes

Scholarly peer review is the process by which a researcher’s work — grant applications and research articles — are subjected to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. This process of evaluation requires a community of experts for a given field who are both qualified and able to perform impartial review. These experts recommend scholarly work for acceptance, revision or rejection. Although impartial review may be difficult to accomplish, it is generally considered essential to academic quality and is used in most important scientific publications. Peer review encourages researchers to meet the accepted standards of their discipline and prevents the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unjustified claims, unacceptable interpretations and personal views.

We frequently write about NIH peer reviewed research here on Highlight HEALTH. The Center for Scientific Review at the National Institutes of Health recently produced a video that provides an inside look at how scientists from across the country review NIH grant applications for scientific and technical merit [1]. Take a front-row seat to a peer review meeting below.


  1. NIH Peer Review Revealed. National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review. Accessed 2010 Jun 16.
About the Author

Walter Jessen, Ph.D. is a Data Scientist, Digital Biologist, and Knowledge Engineer. His primary focus is to build and support expert systems, including AI (artificial intelligence) and user-generated platforms, and to identify and develop methods to capture, organize, integrate, and make accessible company knowledge. His research interests include disease biology modeling and biomarker identification. He is also a Principal at Highlight Health Media, which publishes Highlight HEALTH, and lead writer at Highlight HEALTH.