Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />provided to the principal investigator(s) with recommendations <br />on whether or not the proposed studies should be funded. The <br />major comments of the peer reviewers should provide an objective <br />evaluation of the study proposal and recommendations for <br />improvement. However. the ultimate responsibility is with the <br />principal investigator(s) to develop a sound. scientifically <br />credible study proposal. It would be desirable to provide the <br />name(s) and organization(s) of the peer reviewer(s) to the <br />principal investigator. However. anonymity requested by a peer <br />reviewer should be honored. <br /> <br />(8) It is also desirable that the principal investigator(s) be given <br />an opportunity to ask the peer reviewer(s) for guidance on <br />specific issues related to their proposed research. provided <br />that the peer reviewer does not request to remain anonymous~ <br />Such dialogue between the principal investigator(s) and peer <br />reviewer(s) is extremely beneficial and should result in <br />improved research designs. analyses. interpretation. and <br />application to management. <br /> <br />14 <br />