Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: An observational study

Barnett, Adrian G., Herbert, Danielle L., Campbell, Megan, Daly, Naomi, Roberts, Jason A., Mudge, Alison and Graves, Nicholas (2015) Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: An observational study. BMC Health Services Research, 15 1: . doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0721-7


Author Barnett, Adrian G.
Herbert, Danielle L.
Campbell, Megan
Daly, Naomi
Roberts, Jason A.
Mudge, Alison
Graves, Nicholas
Title Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: An observational study
Journal name BMC Health Services Research   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1472-6963
Publication date 2015-02-07
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0721-7
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 15
Issue 1
Total pages 6
Place of publication London, United Kingdom
Publisher BioMed Central
Collection year 2016
Language eng
Subject 2719 Health Policy
Formatted abstract
Background: Despite the widely recognised importance of sustainable health care systems, health services research
remains generally underfunded in Australia. The Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) is funding
health services research in the state of Queensland. AusHSI has developed a streamlined protocol for applying and
awarding funding using a short proposal and accelerated peer review.
Method: An observational study of proposals for four health services research funding rounds from May 2012 to
November 2013. A short proposal of less than 1,200 words was submitted using a secure web-based portal. The
primary outcome measures are: time spent preparing proposals; a simplified scoring of grant proposals (reject, revise
or accept for interview) by a scientific review committee; and progressing from submission to funding outcomes
within eight weeks. Proposals outside of health services research were deemed ineligible.
Results: There were 228 eligible proposals across 4 funding rounds: from 29% to 79% were shortlisted and 9% to
32% were accepted for interview. Success rates increased from 6% (in 2012) to 16% (in 2013) of eligible proposals.
Applicants were notified of the outcomes within two weeks from the interview; which was a maximum of eight
weeks after the submission deadline. Applicants spent 7 days on average preparing their proposal. Applicants with
a ranking of reject or revise received written feedback and suggested improvements for their proposals, and
resubmissions composed one third of the 2013 rounds.
Conclusions: The AusHSI funding scheme is a streamlined application process that has simplified the process of
allocating health services research funding for both applicants and peer reviewers. The AusHSI process has
minimised the time from submission to notification of funding outcomes.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
Collections: Non HERDC
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 07 Jun 2016, 00:31:12 EST by System User on behalf of Learning and Research Services (UQ Library)