Vr s four base criteria for review
1 / 5

VR’s four base criteria for review - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

VR’s four base criteria for review. Novelty and originality Scientific quality of the proposed research Merits of applicant (s) Feasibility.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' VR’s four base criteria for review' - march

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Vr s four base criteria for review
VR’sfourbasecriteria for review

  • Novelty and originality

  • Scientific quality of the proposed research

  • Merits of applicant(s)

  • Feasibility

For each of thesecriteriathere is a number of ”guidingquestions” for the reviewer to keep in mind whenhe or she reads the proposal.

1 originality
1: Originality

  • Can the project be regarded as unconventional?

  • Does it challenge prevalent opinions or practice?

  • Is there potential for the creation of new knowledge, exciting new ideas and approaches, directions for research and understanding of health and illness?

  • Does the project include use of novel technologies/methodologies, or innovative application of existing methodologies/technologies in new areas?

2 scientific quality
2: Scientificquality

  • Is the project scientifically significant?

  • Does the overall design of the project, its research questions and hypotheses meet the standards of highestquality?

  • Are the scientific/intellectual merits of the proposed research clear, convincing and compelling?

  • Does the proposed project have the character of thoroughness, e. g. in its definition of the problem and proposed solutions, and its review of the state of the art?

  • Are the proposed research methods, infrastructures, equipment and fieldwork appropriate?

3 the applicant
3: The applicant

  • Does the applicant have sufficient research experience, expertise, level of independence and scientific network for implementation of the proposed project?

  • Of what merits are the applicant’s academic qualifications and achievements, in relation to his or her career stage and active time for research?

  • Do the publications show a distinct and independent line of research, or the potential of such?? (Focus on qualityratherthanquantity.)

  • Are the collaboratorsappropriately chosen, with definedroles in the project?

4 feasibility
4: Feasibility

  • Is the general design, including time schedule, optimal for implementing the proposed project?

  • Does the project include the availability and accessibility of relevant personnel, skills, equipment, facilities/infrastructures and other necessary resources?

  • Are materials, patients and methods adequate and well adapted to the hypothesis or research question?

  • Is the environment suitable for carrying out the proposed research?