Skip to main content

On Peer Review in NASA Life Sciences Programs Letter Report (1995) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Report
Pages 1-6

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 1...
... The Committee on Space Biology and Medicine is pleased to respond to your letter of February 21, 1995, requesting that it evaluate the status of NASA life sciences research programs and peer review within the Human Exploration and Development of Space Strategic Enterprise in light of the recommendations of the recent NASA Federal Laboratory Review (NFLR)
Read the entire page →
From page 2...
... Harry Holloway on the current organization of life sciences research and operational support programs within NASA and issues arising out of ongoing restructuring and downsizing of NASA; Dr. Ron White presented a detailed analysis of the results of the newly implemented 1994 external peer review process.
Read the entire page →
From page 3...
... On-site science program managers charged with making funding decisions affecting both in-house NASA scientists and external applicants would inevitably be subject to conflicts of interest that could seriously damage the credibility of the selection process and the relationship with the larger external research community. The committee also notes that life sciences research is a major priority for the International Space Station Alpha (ISSA)
Read the entire page →
From page 4...
... The committee believes, however, that the same principles of external peer review should be applied to all NASA life sciences research whatever the specific program http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ssb/csbmvern.html (4 of 7)
Read the entire page →
From page 5...
... Appropriate criteria and procedures appear to be in place for evaluation of the OLMSA's new peer review process for life sciences with respect to equity and efficiency of operation. These include detailed analyses of scores and funding success rates on the basis of applicant demographics and solicitation of and response to feedback from applicants as well as review panel chairs and panel members.
Read the entire page →
From page 6...
... term ended June 30, 1995 SPACE STUDIES BOARD Claude R Canizares, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair John A
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • operational research
  • nasa scientists
  • external peer
  • operational support
  • nasa centers

  • space studies
  • merit review
  • intramural research
  • nasa federal
  • laboratory review

  • health center
  • mary jane
  • federal laboratory
  • connecticut health
  • life scientists

  • space station
  • space biology
  • nflr recommendations
  • rensselaer polytechnic
  • nflr report

  • jane osborn
  • nasa research
  • space life
  • intramural nasa
  • entire life

  • recent nasa
  • research studies
  • include life
  • research merit
  • expert nasa


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.