Applications are evaluated for scientific and technical merit, with reviewers providing an
overall impact score based on the likelihood of the project exerting a sustained, powerful influence on the research field.
Scored Review Criteria
- Importance of the Research (Significance and Innovation): Evaluates how the project advances understanding of neural circuits relevant to mental health disorders, its translational potential, and the novelty/innovation of the ideas, model systems, tools, or technologies. For R21s, emphasis is placed on conceptual framework, innovation, and potential for significant advancement. Extensive preliminary data is not required.
- Rigor and Feasibility (Approach): Assesses the research design, methods, and analyses. For novel technological approaches, it considers how new approaches improve the field's ability to conduct mental health-relevant research. Includes feasibility of collecting neural recordings and synchronization with behavioral measures.
- Expertise and Resources (Investigator(s) and Environment): Reviews the qualifications of the research team (encouraging varied scientific backgrounds like neurosurgery, electrophysiology, neuroscience, engineering, psychiatry, biostatistics, ethics, psychology) and the suitability of the research environment for invasive studies.
Additional Review Criteria (Considered, but not separately scored)
- Protections for Human Subjects: Evaluation of justification for involvement, proposed protections, potential benefits, importance of knowledge gained, and data/safety monitoring for clinical trials (if applicable). Includes assessment of co-enrollment plans.
- Vertebrate Animals: If applicable, evaluation of proposed procedures, justification for animal use, and interventions to minimize discomfort.
- Biohazards: If applicable, assessment of hazardous materials/procedures and proposed protections.
- Resubmissions/Renewals/Revisions: Evaluation of the updated application, progress made, or appropriateness of scope expansion, respectively.
Additional Review Considerations (Considered, but not scored)
- Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources: Evaluation of plans for identifying and ensuring validity of resources.
- Budget and Period of Support: Assessment of whether the budget and requested period are justified and reasonable for the proposed research.