[存參] CIHR reform

關於加拿大 CIHR 的新聞，上個禮拜新聞都出來後才收到連署的 e-mail (最下面)，發現連署 open letter 的名單裡有我大學和研究所的老闆，還有 committee members。XD

CIHR: Message from the Minister of Health to Canada's health research community

CIHR: Message from Dr. Alain Beaudet to Canada's health research community


1. [The Scientist] Researchers to CIHR: Reverse Peer Review Changes

The changes are part of a system revamp initiated by CIHR President Alain Beaudet a few years ago after receiving recommendations from an international review panel led by the former US National Institutes of Health director, Elias Zerhouni, Science reported. In an effort to reduce researchers’ burden of constantly applying for grants, the CIHR created two types of grants: in addition to more-traditional “Project scheme” grants, which offer five years of funding for more focused research projects, the agency now offers “Foundation scheme” grants, which provide annual funding for up to seven years, for more open-ended research. And in an effort to improve “quality, fairness and transparency” and reduce reviewer fatigue, the CIHR instituted an online system that distributes grant applications to four reviewers who participate in virtual discussion mediated by 140 other scientists.

2. W Kondro, Update: Canada's health funder agrees to meet with researchers outraged by peer-review changes. Science (2016)

“CIHR embarked on the reform of its open funding programs and peer review process to improve the sustainability of our health research system, the transparency and fairness of our granting processes, and the quality and impact of the research supported by federal investments,” he wrote. “However, the online system implemented to ensure an unbiased and tailored evaluation of each research proposal has raised serious concerns among applicants and reviewers alike.

Under the reforms, CIHR essentially obliterated its array of existing grant programs, replacing them with a regime that essentially awards two types of grants: “Foundation scheme” grants that provided $38,800 to $1.16 million annually for up to 7 years for work on more open-ended research (with duration and size pegged to how “established” a researcher was); and “Project scheme” grants of $38,800 to $581,000 annually for up to 5 years for more focused research projects.

3. W Kondro, After protest, Canada’s health science funder reverses course on peer review changes. Science (2016)

"At an all-day meeting here with roughly 50 practicing scientists, convened at the behest of federal health minister Jane Philpott to quell an uprising over CIHR grantsmaking reforms, Beaudet agreed to the introduction of a “hybrid” peer review system. It will use on-line review to cull roughly 60% of grants from consideration, with the surviving 40% of proposals subject to face-to-face peer review to determine actual competition winners."

--

This email is excerpted and revised from a message Brian Christie as CIHR delegate sent to University of Victoria health researchers.

Dear Colleagues,

Over the past two years CIHR has reformed their granting programs and peer review system. These reforms, coupled with the low levels of funding success rates and fewer competitions, many of us believe, have had a negative impact on the Canadian health research community. The concerns in the research community has also been reported in international, national and municipal news outlets such as :

CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/cihr-health-science-research-funding-controversy-1.3649635

Ottawa citizen: http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/scientists-urge-health-minister-to-stop-failed-experiment-at-cihr

Science Magazine:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/07/canada-outraged-health-researchers-demand-end-peer-review-changes?utm_source=newsfromscience&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=peerup-5456

These concerns have now lead to an emergency meeting called by the Minister of Health to listen to the concerns raised by researchers on the new CIHR on the peer review system.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/health-minister-calls-emergency-meeting-to-deal-with-cihr-reform-revolt


We are interested in understanding how these recent CIHR reforms may have affected your ability to conduct research and as such are asking you to please take the time to fill out this survey (150 people have completed this already). The data will be used to quantitatively assess the current situation our research community is facing. http://survey.ubc.ca/surveys/37-5be05ffd3c35dc1d006efa42bba/canadian-pi-survey/

Furthermore there are two online letter/petitions that offer you the chance to add your voice:

- The Canadian Society for Molecular Biosciences has just started an online petition to demand that CIHR returns to face-to-face peer review for the fall competitions, and that the Science review panel requires this as standard for tricouncil funding - a fallback plan if no action should be taken for the fall. https://www.csmb-scbm.ca/advocacy/Petition.aspx

- There is also an excellent letter by Jim Woodgett many people (over 1200) have signed already. If you have not signed the Woodgett letter and would like to, it can be viewed at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nzzO0tskEat4da-9azA0sv1PoqKt2NvKAN4Z0ErZdiE/edit?pref=2&pli=1 For this letter, you simply insert your name and affiliation into the online document and the author will accept the changes after reviewing them.

Many thanks to Brian Christie for the bones of this email.