Competition for available funding has grown increasingly intense. This trend is unlikely to change as Canada continues to expand its infrastructure for health research. For this reason, within the Research Portfolio of CIHR, we cannot afford to be consumed by disappointment. Canada owes its reputation for research excellence to an open, accountable and very rigorous peer review system for funding applications. We must re-double our efforts to ensure that the peer review processes used to guide CIHR's funding decisions are the very best that they can be. In light of the recent competition results, we have heard from a small number of active peer reviewers and others who are frustrated to the point of no longer wishing to participate in the peer review process. Such frustration, no matter how limited, leaves me gravely concerned because CIHR is at a point in time where the participation of the absolute best in its peer review processes is critical.
In October, the President put forth a call for advice from our research community on how our peer review processes could be improved. I'm very pleased to report that we continue to receive a steady flow of thoughtful and constructive suggestions. At present, we're working to analyse and prioritize potential modifications and innovations. However, it remains a fact that without the active participation of Canada's best health researchers in the process itself, all the peer review modifications and innovations won't be of any help.
Pierre Chartrand, PhD
Vice President, Research Portfolio
