Reviewer in Training Program

Program Parameters

Participants in the Mentee role will be assigned up to three applications to review based on their self-declared ability to review. Mentees will also be assigned a Mentor who will be available to provide advice and support throughout the review process. Mentees must submit their reviews to their Mentor at least 2 weeks before the meeting for the Mentor to provide feedback on review quality. Mentees will attend the committee meeting in its entirety, where they will have an opportunity to present one review noting that only the most competitive applications are discussed at a committee meeting. They will not participate in the final scoring of any application, nor in the budget discussion. The meeting participation parameters may vary to fit the committee context while still achieving the principles of the program.

Eligibilty

• Must meet CIHR’s definition of an ECR on the application deadline for the Project Grant Competition;
• Must be working at a Canadian institution on the application deadline for the Project Grant Competition;
• Must not have previously participated in the RiT Program;
• Must not have previously reviewed for the Project Grant competition; and
• Must not be full College members.

Mentorship

The College of Reviewers has developed a guide for Mentees to help facilitate the mentorship process during the RiT Program. This guide will be provided to you prior to the committee meeting.

Roles and Responsibilities

Before the meeting

The Mentee will:

• complete the learning modules on:
  • Bias in Peer Review
  • Conducting Quality Reviews
  • one of following modules based on your methodological expertise:
    • Introduction to Sex and Gender Considerations in Basic Science
    • Introduction to Sex and Gender Considerations in Clinical and Epidemiological Research
  • Additional mandatory learning for participants in the Indigenous Health Research (IHR) committee:
    • Background context on Indigenous Health Research
    • Research Involving First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada (TCPS 2 Chapter 9) – Webinar
• familiarize themselves with all materials provided by CIHR;
• declare any conflict of interest;
• confirm their ability to review through ResearchNet;
• be introduced to their Mentor, the committee Chair or Scientific Officer, by CIHR staff;
• be assigned up to three applications suitable to their declared expertise;
• seek advice and support from their Mentors and submit reviews for feedback on MS Teams two weeks leading up to the meeting; and
• notify CIHR staff of any issues they encounter throughout the program.

Important: While a Mentee can ask their Mentor questions about the review process and review quality as it pertains to their practice review, scientific opinions and/or merit of an application should not be the focus.

During the meeting

The Mentee will:

• be expected to attend the committee meeting date(s) in their entirety;
• be prepared to present any one of their reviews, noting that not all applications are discussed at a committee meeting;
• present their review and preliminary score as scheduled in the meeting agenda and sequence of steps;
• be able to compare their practice score with the consensus score;
• follow meeting participation parameters outlined by the Chair at the start of the meeting;
• not ask their Mentor questions during the meeting as they will be occupied with other tasks (CIHR staff remain available at all times);
• not participate in the consensus discussion or final scoring of any application; and
• not participate in the budget discussion of any application.

After the meeting

The Mentee will:

• note that their reviews are for learning purposes and as a non-scoring reviewer, their reviews are not shared with applicants;
• be promoted to peer review processes at CIHR and participate when available; and
• be invited to become an Associate Member if they meet the program's eligibility criteria.

Review Quality Assurance

After participating in the committee meeting, the Chairs, Scientific Officers and CIHR staff will provide feedback on Mentees using a similar approach to CIHR's standardized Reviewer Quality Feedback form. Mentees will receive feedback based on the Review Quality Checklist and their performance during the peer review process. This letter will state one of the following outcomes:

1. Outstanding contributor: Overall, the Mentee exceeded the expectations in all areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation, and Responsiveness.
2. Effective contributor: Overall, the Mentee met the expectations in all areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation and Responsiveness.
3. Needs improvement: The Mentee did not meet the criteria in one or more areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation, and/or Responsiveness.

The purpose of this feedback is to help Mentees build on their experiences in the RiT Program and apply their learning to future peer review opportunities.

Program Parameters

Participants in the ECR Reviewer role will be assigned up to five applications to review based on their self-declared ability to review. ECR Reviewers must submit their reviews in accordance with committee deadlines. ECR Reviewers will attend the peer review meeting in its entirety, present their reviews, and participate in the committee meeting discussions including final consensus ratings, individual voting, and budget assessment. ECR Reviewers will present their assigned applications later in the meeting, and will have access to all of the supportive resources that CIHR provides to committee members.

Eligibility

• Must meet CIHR’s definition of an ECR on the application deadline for the Project Grant Competition;
• Must be working at a Canadian institution on the application deadline for the Project Grant Competition;
• Must have at least one recent federally funded (or equivalent) peer reviewed grant as a Principal Investigator;
• Must not have previously participated in the RiT Program as an ECR Reviewer;
• Must not have previously reviewed for the Project Grant competition.

Applicants who have previously participated as a Mentee, and now meet these criteria, are eligible to participate as an ECR Reviewer.

Roles and Responsibilities

ECR Reviewers will follow the same roles and responsibilities as regular reviewers as outlined in the Project Grant manual except where differences are noted below. Briefly:

Before the meeting

The ECR Reviewer will:

• complete the learning modules on:
  • Bias in Peer Review
  • Conducting Quality Reviews
  • one of following modules based on your methodological expertise:
    • Introduction to Sex and Gender Considerations in Basic Science
    • Introduction to Sex and Gender Considerations in Clinical and Epidemiological Research
  • Additional mandatory learning for participants in the Indigenous Health Research (IHR) committee:
    • Background context on Indigenous Health Research
    • Research Involving First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada (TCPS 2 Chapter 9) – Webinar
• declare any conflict of interest;
• confirm their ability to review through ResearchNet;
• be assigned up to five applications to review based on their self-declared ability to review;
• evaluate each of the applications assigned to them by providing a critical assessment of the applications, as well as providing constructive feedback based on the program’s objectives and adjudication criteria described in the funding opportunity;
• provide their initial ratings to one decimal place on ResearchNet;
• divide their applications into a top (competitive) and bottom (non-competitive) group, based on their overall quality;
• familiarize themselves with the applications to be assessed by their committee as this will facilitate discussions at the committee meeting; and
• notify CIHR staff of any issues they encounter throughout the program.

During the meeting

The ECR Reviewer will:

• be expected to attend the committee meeting date(s) in their entirety;
• present to the committee their review of their assigned applications;
• be able to present their assigned applications later in the meeting;
• participate in the committee discussions; and
• vote on all the applications discussed by the committee and for which they are not in conflict.

After the meeting

The ECR Reviewer will:

• have the option to revise their reviews within 5 business days after the end of the committee meeting;
• be promoted to peer review processes at CIHR and participate when available; and
• be invited to become an Associate Member if they meet the program's eligibility criteria.

Review Quality Assurance

After participating in the committee meeting, the Chairs, Scientific Officers and CIHR staff will provide feedback on ECR Reviewers using CIHR's standardized Reviewer Quality Feedback form. ECR Reviewers will receive feedback based on the Review Quality Checklist and their performance during the peer review process. This letter will state one of the following outcomes:

1. Outstanding contributor: Overall, the Mentee exceeded the expectations in all areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation, and Responsiveness.
2. Effective contributor: Overall, the Mentee met the expectations in all areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation and Responsiveness.
3. Needs improvement: The Mentee did not meet the criteria in one or more areas of the RiT Program: Review Quality, Participation, and/or Responsiveness.

Mentorship

The College of Reviewers has developed a guide for Mentors to help facilitate the mentorship process during the RiT Program. This guide will be provided to you prior to the committee meeting.

Roles and Responsibilites

Before the meeting

The Mentor will:

• be assigned a Mentee by CIHR staff in collaboration with committee executives;
• be introduced to the Mentee and will be asked to make themselves available to answer questions through MS Teams;
• read and assess the review quality of the practice reviews prior to the meeting; and
• provide Mentee with constructive feedback on review quality.

Important: While you can answer questions about the review process, review quality, and provide feedback on the practice reviews, scientific opinions and/or merit of an application should not be the focus.

During the meeting

Formal mentorship stops however, the Chair and Scientific Officer will:

• explain Mentee’s participation parameters at the start of the meeting during the sequence of steps presentation;
• encourage and make space in the meeting for the Mentee to actively participate;
• observe the Mentee’s participation throughout the committee meeting; and
• record the Mentee’s comments during the discussion as anything they say will have an influence on the final consensus.

After the meeting

The Mentor will:

• consider meeting with their Mentee to debrief on their experience.

Roles and Responsibilities

CIHR staff will be available to answer questions and support both the Mentees, Mentors, and ECR Reviewers throughout the RiT Program.

Before the meeting

CIHR staff will:

• introduce the Mentee and Mentor, providing them with an environment to collaborate (MS Teams);
• assign Mentees up to 3 Project Grant applications for review (up to 5 applications assigned to ECR Reviewers);
• provide access to appropriate learning materials and webinars; and
• provide Mentee Guidie instructions that outline meeting participation parameters.

During the meeting

CIHR staff will:

• ensure that the Mentee presents their review as scheduled in the agenda and sequence of steps; and
• ensure that the Mentee follows meeting participation parameters.

After the meeting

CIHR staff will:

• collect Review Quality Feedback forms from Chairs and Scientific Officers;
• provide RQA feedback to Mentees and ECR Reviewers; and
• collect feedback from all participants about their experience with the program.