P
eer review is the abiding and essential cornerstone of research grant funding at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Virtually all funding decisions are based primarily on the priority score given to the application by an independent, expert panel of reviewers. Consequently, the continued excellence of NIH-funded research is directly dependent upon peer review that is scientifically rigorous and fair. Assuring continued excellence of peer review is essential to the NIH mission in biomedical research.
Management of the NIH peer review system is the responsibility of the Center for Scientific Review. All grant applications received are assigned by the center to a primary review group, or "study section." The composition and area of focus of study sections have evolved over time and are dictated by traditions in science and the numbers of applications received. Over the years, a large number of study sections (over 100) were created, each with varying focus and title. In this system, liver disease-related research grants were directed to a variety of study sections. The majority were directed to General Medicine A, Subcommittee 2, which reviewed a broad spectrum of grants related to gastrointestinal, pancreatic, and liver disease. Other liver disease-related grants were reviewed in pathology, surgery, anesthesiology, virology, cell and molecular biology, physiology, immunology, epidemiology, toxicology, and alcohol study sections. A frequent issue arose as to whether liver disease research deserved a separate study section, but uncertainty about how to rearrange assignment and combine expertise into one study section prevented major changes.
In 1998, under the leadership of Dr. Ellie Ehrenfeld and with a mandate from the NIH director, the Center for Scientific Review embarked upon an ambitious plan to restructure primary review groups. Broad categories of research were defined, including Digestive Sciences. In exercises using real grants and experienced reviewers, new boundaries and research areas were established. For digestive diseases, five separate study sections were proposed, including one that focused primarily on liver research: the Hepatobiliary Pathophysiology study section.
The Hepatobiliary Pathophysiology study section held its historic first meeting in Washington, DC, on February 23 and 24, 2004. The scientific review administrator was Dr. Patricia Greenwel, and the chairman was Dr. Gregory Gores. The 26 members (10 M.D.'s, 10 Ph.D.'s, and six with both degrees) included leaders and active investigators in the fields of liver cell and molecular biology, regeneration, stem cells, cell injury, cholestasis, viral hepatitis, alcoholic and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, liver transplantation, pharmacology, virology, and immunology (Fig. ). The group reviewed 67 applications, of which 54 were regular research project grants (R01s) and 13 were developmental and exploratory research grants (R21s). These included 15 renewal and 52 new applications. Fifteen (22%) were revisions of grants previously reviewed but unfunded. The applications spanned the spectrum of liver disease research, including 27 in basic research (cell biology, injury, fibrosis, regeneration, stem cells, bile acids, cholestasis), nine in viral hepatitis, 12 in fatty liver disease, four in autoimmunity, three in pediatrics, three in transplantation, three in gallstones, and six in other areas. In keeping with NIH review policy, approximately half of the applications were unscored. These applications were