Peer Review

Printer-friendly version

The Data Steward(s) prefer applications with proof of Peer Review, an external scholarly review by experts in the appropriate field, such as a grant funding agency Peer Review Committee. If the project has been peer reviewed, Researchers should include:

  • The project description used for the Peer Review
  • Written comments issued by the reviewer
  • A copy of the official funding/grant letter

Proxy Peer Review Pilot

Currently applications that have not received a Peer Review from an appropriate channel (for example from a public funding agency, or a Student Masters Committee or Doctoral Committee ) should provide a CV from the Principal Investigator or letter from the Review Committee (for student projects) in place of a formal Peer Review.

Population Data BC (PopData) has been working with Data Stewards to develop and pilot a process to enable non-funded, or privately funded studies, a way to provide Peer Review documentation to help the application to proceed to the next step of the process. This Proxy Peer Review process is intended to provide evidence of Peer Review (and therefore scientific merit and potential impact) for a Data Access Request (DAR).

The pilot currently includes DARs with the following funding state:

  • Private industry funding
  • Funding provided outside of an independent peer review process (e.g., departmental start-up funds)
  • No funding/no existing peer review

The Proxy Peer Review process was developed using the same standards as the Canadian Institute of Health Research Peer Review Process, and will be completed by three unique reviewers (a content expert; an administrative data expert; and PopData’s scientific advisor). Those deemed through this Proxy Peer Review process to have appropriate levels of scientific merit and potential impact will be eligible for review by Data Stewards.

We hope to finalize and formally launch this process in 2016.

< back to completing the DAR

Page last revised: October 13, 2015