Meeting Expectations: NIH Review Criterion on Scientific Rigor and Reproducibility


In January 2016, NIH introduced new review criteria concerning scientific rigor and reproducibility that affect virtually all research grant applications. In this workshop, representatives from NIH and the scientific community offer advice to grant applicants about navigating the new policy requirements.

Link back to full workshop


To give a little more info, applicants must now address:

  • Scientific premise
  • Scientific rigor (which includes rigorous experimental design, robust and unbiased results, including full transparency in reporting so that others may be able to reproduce and extend the findings)
  • Consideration of relevant biological variables (such as sex)
  • Authentication of key biological and chemical resources


Is it sufficient to introduce rigor into grants or should we also introduce rigor into published work?
If so what are the best ways to do this?


I think the “Scientific Premise” is confusing to many, especially students. Below is a link to Open Mike who does a good job explaining it: