Julio Aguirre-Ghiso, Rose C. Falkenstein Chair in Cancer Biology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, shared a post on LinkedIn:
“When reviewing a grant, please keep in mind that it is fundamentally different from reviewing a paper.
A grant presents preliminary data to justify future experiments, not a complete and finalized data set. Applying paper‑level, retrospective scrutiny to prospective work-or reshaping the application to match questions you wish had been asked rather than those actually proposed-can be unfair and needlessly disadvantage the applicant.
Instead, ask how you would want your own work to be evaluated, make a genuine effort to stand in the applicant’s shoes, and focus on being constructive within the constraints of limited time and resources. Peer review is not the place to demonstrate how clever the reviewer is, but to help the best, most feasible science move forward.”
Other articles featuring Julio Aguirre-Ghiso on OncoDaily.