Principles of expert review

What is expert review?

Expert review (also known as peer review) is the assessment of the value and quality of research applications by independent experts.

Experts are individuals with relevant knowledge or experience in a subject area. For example, this may include academic researchers, clinicians, industry representatives and regulators, and other interested members of the public, where appropriate.

Expert review is used to guide research funding, help trustees make sure funding is used effectively and support the credibility of the charities contributions to research. Done properly, expert review allows charities to support high-quality research and the talented researchers. This, in turn, can help charities maximise the impact of their funding and deliver changes that really matter to their supporters and stakeholders, so that patients benefit from the fruits of research.

As a member of the AMRC, we are implementing their principles of expert review when selecting our research for funding:

Reviews are proportionate to the size and scale of the award. The expertise of reviewers is sufficient and relevant to provide effective review.

Taking into account advice provided by experts who are independent of the charity’s staff and trustees.

Seeking recommendations from a variety of experts with suitable knowledge or experience, who reflect the views of a range of stakeholders.

Rotating experts involved in decision making to make sure we are regularly considering fresh perspectives in the review process.

Publishing and adhering to a conflicts of interest policy.

Publishing our research strategy and expert review process online so that external audiences can understand the methods using to make funding decisions, including the names of experts involved (see Finance, Investment & Audit Committee,  Research Committee,  Scientific Advisory Committee).

For more information on the AMRC’s principles of expert review, follow this link.