ArticleF1000Research2026
The costs and benefits of research grant funding peer review.
Article in F1000Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The costs and benefits of research grant funding peer review.F1000Research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the costs of developing, writing, reviewing, and deciding on research proposals is a critical prerequisite for understanding the efficiency of funding decisions. The objective of this study was to develop estimates for cost and transaction cost - the ratio of cost to funding - for a sample of different funding schemes administered by two funders. The perceived benefits of the peer-review funding process to applicants, reviewers, and panelists were also explored. A total of 12,617 individuals were surveyed between April 2022 and June 2023, with an overall response rate of 11%. The study estimated that the cost of grant and fellowship application processes is 13% of the value of the grant and that 89% of those costs are borne by applicants. This would suggest that policies seeking to improve the efficiency of grant funding processes should consider the role of university and research institute practices alongside funder requirements and assessment processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.