Funding agencies use many different criteria and peer review strategies to assess grant proposals.

An automatic computer vision analysis approach can assist in the diagnosis of rare genetic disorders by using ordinary photographs of patients.

White principal investigators applying to the National Science Foundation are consistently funded at higher rates than most non-white PIs.

A survey of health and medical researchers revealed important diffrences in how career disruption is treated in funding decisions, with differences in what applicants with disruption are willing to divulge and the adjustments made by reviewers.

What can institutions and funding agencies do to address an array of issues facing the biomedical research community in the United States?

There is a clear need to encourage exploratory research within the framework of open science.

Tackling unconscious bias is a major challenge for journals and the rest of the scientific community.

A study of more than 75,000 grant proposals to the European Union indicates that the outcomes of the peer review process remain stable in response to changes in the way that peer review is organized.

A series of articles exploring how journals, funding agencies and universities review papers, grant applications and people.

Journals are exploring new approaches to peer review in order to reduce bias, increase transparency and respond to author preferences.