At
SBM David Gorski quoted another essay that discussed the OMB proposals to change how NIH grants are funded: "Removing scores from summary statements reduces transparency in peer review, as it denies applicants the knowledge of how their applications were viewed and ranked by reviewers, and withholds valuable information from program staff who integrate these peer review decisions into their funding recommendations to IC directors."
Dr. Gorski then provided some of his own thoughts: "I suspect that the reason for this change is more to make it easier for political appointees to put their finger on the scales deciding which grants are and are not funded without leaving an obvious tell that that’s what happened, such as a grant with a priority score of 1.2 and a 1.5 percentile ranking on the social determinants of health not being funded while a grant with a priority score of 4 and a 40th percentile ranking proposing to study RFK Jr.’s latest favorite supplement receiving funding. The demoralization of scientists serving on study sections is just a happy byproduct of the policy to Russell Vought."