Scientific Peer Review

Scientific Peer Review

Peer review of research applications

Independent scientific peer review is essential for achieving best practice through enhancing the quality of research. Peer review should be supportive and constructive and should consider all aspects of study design including feasibility, the quality of the research questions, acceptability to study participants and the importance of the research.

Research applications led by University staff must follow the University's Peer Review Procedure*. The Head of School/Institute will only approve proposals which require peer review, once they are satisfied appropriate review has taken place and any comments have been addressed. *Institute of Applied Health Sciences – all research funding applications (regardless of value) must be peer reviewed prior to approval of the Head of Institute.

Studies which are awarded external funding will also undergo independent peer review under the funder's assessment process.

Internally funded projects

As internally funded studies will not have been through the peer review process described above evidence of peer review will be requested by the Research Governance team during the assessment of the project for sponsorship.

Diagram illustrating order of stages in planning research: 1: Study design; 2: Facilities; 3: Scientific Peer Review; 4: Secure Funding; 5: Prepare study documentation; 6: Sponsorship; 7: Protocol; 8: Contracts; 9: Registration on public database; 10: Finalise study documents; 11: Statutory approvals; 12: Ethics review; 13: Initiation of study