Innovating Research Funding cover page

Innovating in the Research Funding Process: Peer Review Alternatives and Adaptations

In support of the AcademyHealth Paradigm Project, this horizon scan reviews options for innovating the research funding processes.

Download Publication

Like many fields, health services research relies on peer review to assure rigor and relevance. However, evidence demonstrates that the current approach is time-consuming for both researchers and reviewers, has limited power to predict research outcomes, and is subject to conservatism, inconsistent results, and potential bias. Lotteries, self-review, open peer review, innovation prizes, and other approaches have emerged as potential alternatives, but each of these options comes with its own advantages and disadvantages.

Additional information can be found at


Susan Guthrie

Research Leader - RAND Corporation

Susan Guthrie is a research leader at RAND Europe. Read Bio