02470nas a2200169   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002260001500043100002200058700002100080700001600101700001800117700002000135245005400155856004900209520204200258       2025                            d  c2025-02-011 aJoanie Sims Gould1 aAnne M. Lasinsky1 aAdrian Mota1 aKarim M. Khan1 aClare L. Ardern00aThreats to grant peer review: a qualitative study  uhttps://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/15/2/e0916663 aBackground and objectives Peer review is ubiquitous in evaluating scientific research. While peer review of manuscripts submitted to journals has been widely studied, there has been relatively less attention paid to peer review of grant applications (despite how crucial peer review is to researchers having the means and capacity to conduct research). There is spirited debate in academic community forums (including on social media) about the perceived benefits and limitations of grant peer review. The aim of our study was to understand the experiences and challenges faced by grant peer reviewers.

Methods Therefore, we conducted qualitative interviews with 18 members of grant review panels—the Chairs, peer reviewers and Scientific Officers of a national funding agency—that highlight threats to the integrity of grant peer review.

Results We identified three threats: (1) lack of training and limited opportunities to learn, (2) challenges in differentiating and rating applications of similar strength, and (3) reviewers weighting reputations and relationships in the review process to differentiate grant applications of a similar strength. These threats were compounded by reviewers’ stretched resources or lack of time. Our data also highlighted the essential role of the Chair in ensuring transparency and rigorous grant peer review.

Conclusions As researchers continue to evaluate the threats to grant peer review, the reality of stretched resources and time must be considered. We call on funders and academic institutions to implement practices that reduce reviewer burden.

Data are available upon reasonable request. The datasets generated or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to confidentiality requirements for ethics. Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. We will consider requests for data in an aggregate form (ie, the coded or themed data), and any requests must identify the specific area of interest for which the data request is made.