SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Rethinking the Funding Line at the Swiss National Science Foundation: Bayesian Ranking and Lottery
16 references·5 citing·48 second hop
Rethinking the Funding Line at the Swiss National Science Foundation: Bayesian Ranking and Lottery (2022)Rethinking the Funding Line at the Swiss …The acceptability of using a lottery to allocate research funding: a survey of applicants (2020)The acceptability of using a …What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences? (2018)What do we know about grant p…Research Funding: the Case for a Modified Lottery (2016)Research Funding: the Case fo…NIH peer review percentile scores are poorly predictive of grant productivity (2016)NIH peer review percentile sc…Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success (2016)Interdisciplinary research ha…Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands (2015)Gender contributes to persona…Threats to objectivity in peer review: the case of gender (2014)Threats to objectivity in pee…Panel discussion does not improve reliability of peer review for medical research grant proposals (2011)Panel discussion does not imp…Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial (2010)Graphical methods and numeric…Sample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Review (2008)Sample Size and Precision in …Peering at peer review revealed high degree of chance associated with funding of grant applications (2006)Peering at peer review reveal…A Multilevel Cross-Classified Modelling Approach to Peer Review of Grant Proposals: The Effects of Assessor and Researcher Attributes on Assessor Ratings (2003)A Multilevel Cross-Classified…Measuring agreement in method comparison studies (1999)Measuring agreement in method…League Tables and Their Limitations: Statistical Issues in Comparisons of Institutional Performance (1996)League Tables and Their Limit…Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Chance and Consensus in Peer …Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. (1979)Intraclass correlations: Uses…Why research integrity matters and how it can be improved (2023)Why research integrity matter…Targeted, actionable and fair: Reviewer reports as feedback and its effect on ECR career choices (2023)Targeted, actionable and fair…Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making (2023)Exploring the effect of overl…Why citizen review might beat peer review at identifying pursuitworthy scientific research (2022)Why citizen review might beat…Research calls, competition for funding and inefficiency (2022)Research calls, competition f…Statistical principles in experimental design. (1962)Statistical Principles in Experimental Design (2003)A multilevel perspective on gender in classroom motivation and climate: Potential benefits of male teachers for boys? (2008)Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. (2008)Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches (2009)Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. (2002)Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. (2003)Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students (2012)Strategies for Identifying and Closing the Gender Salary Gap in Surgery (2017)Gender in authorship and editorship in medical education journals: A bibliometric review (2020)The impact of double-blind peer review on gender bias in scientific publishing: a systematic review (2022)On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B. (1975)Growing Up (1982)Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. (1999)Social Indicators (2002)Tuning Educational Structures in Europe (2003)Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests (1951)Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores (1969)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The job demands-resources model of burnout. (2001)A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research (2016)Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. (1989)Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance☆ (2009)Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations (2018)Scaling Down Inequality: Rating Scales, Gender Bias, and the Architecture of Evaluation (2019)Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations (2020)Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies (1983)STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT (1986)Agreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual (2007)Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed (2010)Understanding Bland Altman analysis (2015)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Matthew Effect in Science (1968)Concentration or dispersal of research funding? (2019)Contest models highlight inherent inefficiencies of scientific funding competitions (2019)The value of research funding for knowledge creation and dissemination: A study of SNSF Research Grants (2021)A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society (2007)Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators (2009)The science of science: From the perspective of complex systems (2017)Science of science (2018)Machine behaviour (2019)Graphical Tools for Network Meta-Analysis in STATA (2013)Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods (2015)The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations (2015)From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis (1983)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments (2006)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1979Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.23,882 cited
  • 1999Measuring agreement in method comparison studies9,616 cited
  • 2010Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial3,764 cited
  • 1996League Tables and Their Limitations: Statistical Issues in Comparisons of Institutional Performance1,068 cited
  • 1981Chance and Consensus in Peer Review623 cited
  • 2016Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success598 cited
  • 2015Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands305 cited
  • 2016Research Funding: the Case for a Modified Lottery162 cited
  • 2003A Multilevel Cross-Classified Modelling Approach to Peer Review of Grant Proposals: The Effects of Assessor and Researcher Attributes on Assessor Ratings139 cited
  • 2014Threats to objectivity in peer review: the case of gender134 cited
  • 2016NIH peer review percentile scores are poorly predictive of grant productivity111 cited
  • 2018What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences?102 cited
  • 2011Panel discussion does not improve reliability of peer review for medical research grant proposals87 cited
  • 2006Peering at peer review revealed high degree of chance associated with funding of grant applications

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

71 cited
  • 2020The acceptability of using a lottery to allocate research funding: a survey of applicants68 cited
  • 2008Sample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Review57 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2023Why research integrity matters and how it can be improved47 cited
    • 2023Targeted, actionable and fair: Reviewer reports as feedback and its effect on ECR career choices10 cited
    • 2022Why citizen review might beat peer review at identifying pursuitworthy scientific research8 cited
    • 2022Research calls, competition for funding and inefficiency8 cited
    • 2023Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making7 cited