Skip to main content

Table 4 Importance of specific factors in reviewers' decisions to conduct review

From: Surveys of current status in biomedical science grant review: funding organisations' and grant reviewers' perspectives

 

Not at all important, n (%)

Slightly important, n (%)

Important, n (%)

Very important, n (%)

Extremely important, n (%)

Most important factor, n (%)

Opportunity to learn something new

5 (2)

46 (18)

98 (38)

70 (27)

24 (9)

35 (14)

Wanting to keep up to date on research advances in specific areas

7 (3)

39 (15)

88 (34)

85 (33)

25 (10)

35 (14)

Relevance of the topic to your own work or interests

5 (2)

35 (14)

85 (33)

91 (35)

27 (11)

25 (10)

Wanting to enhance your CV and career prospects

85 (33)

98 (38)

37 (14)

20 (8)

3 (1)

6 (2)

Reputation of the funding organisation

25 (10)

65 (25)

104 (43)

41 (16)

7 (3)

2 (1)

Wanting to get known as a reviewer

94 (36)

65 (25)

60 (23)

16 (6)

4 (2)

4 (2)

A sense of professional duty

9 (4)

19 (7)

93 (36)

82 (32)

38 (15)

77 (30)

Wanting to help pay back the efforts of others

18 (7)

49 (19)

92 (36)

67 (26)

16 (6)

10 (4)

Wanting to help external fairness in decision taking by grant review committees

8 (3)

22 (9)

82 (32)

88 (34)

43 (17)

31 (12)

Wanting to help ensure innovation is not suppressed

9 (4)

40 (16)

87 (34)

70 (27)

34 (13)

7 (3)

Wanting to keep your reviewing skills up to date

49 (19)

62 (24)

77 (30)

41 (16)

11 (4)

1 (1)

  1. Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding and/or missing data.