国家自然科学基金项目的函评意见质量现况与分析——以2019年医学科学部两学科的面上、青年科学基金项目为例  

The Studies on the Quality of Reviewers'Comments for Proposals Received by NSFC--by Analyzing Reviewers'Comments for Proposals Received in 2019 from Two Disciplines of Department of Hearth Sciences

作　　者：刘昀 梁雪[1,3] 廖丹颖 江虎军 Liu Yun;Liang Xue;Liao Danying;Jiang Hujun(Department of Health Sciences,National Natural Science Foundation of China,Beijing100085;The Second Hospital Affiliated to Xi'an Jiaotong University,Xi'an 710004;The Fifth Hospital Affiliated to Guangzhou Medical University,Guangzhou510700;Union Hospital Affiliated to Tongji Medical College,Huazhong Science and Technology University,Wuhan 430022)

机构地区：[1]国家自然科学基金委员会医学科学部,北京100085 [2]西安交通大学第二附属医院,西安710004 [3]广州医科大学附属第五医院,广州510700 [4]华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院,武汉430022

出　　处：《中国科学基金》2020年第5期630-634,共5页Bulletin of National Natural Science Foundation of China

摘　　要：以2019年医学科学部呼吸、血液两个学科受理的面上项目和青年科学基金项目的函评意见为研究对象,就函评意见的专业性和从函评意见中的收获对项目申请人进行了问卷调查,同时学科管理人员也对函评意见专业性进行了评价。其结果在一定意义上反映了国家自然科学基金项目函评意见的基本情况,表明保持和进一步提高同行评议质量仍然是国家自然科学基金项目同行评议工作中的重要任务。With the rapid growth of the number of proposals received by National Natural Science Foundation of China(NSFC),the quality of peer review show a trend to decline.So it is very significant for not only applicants but grant managers to improve the quality of peer review.We ask applicants to evaluate the value of reviewers'comments for their proposals from academic angle,while grant managers also evaluate all of reviewers'comments in a similar way,in order to outline the current general situation of peer review in NSFC.Our results indicate that the quality of peer review is far from perfect although generally good,and to improve the quality of peer review is still a major task for NSFC.

关 键 词：科学基金项目 函评意见 质量评价 

分 类 号：G322[文化科学]