| 赵婉莹,王立丽,王璐瑶,袁子晗,赵勇.国家重点研发计划拟立项与未立项项目同行评议质量比较研究—— 以农业农村领域为例[J].情报工程,2026,(2):117-126 |
| 国家重点研发计划拟立项与未立项项目同行评议质量比较研究—— 以农业农村领域为例 |
| Comparative Study on Peer Review Reliability of Proposed and Unproposed National Key Research and Development Programs: A Case Study of Agriculture and Rural Areas |
| |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 国家重点研发计划；农业农村领域；同行评议；质量 |
| 英文关键词: National Key Research and Development Plan; Agriculture and Rural Areas; Peer Review; Quality |
| 基金项目:中国农村技术开发中心委托项目“农业农村领域科技项目诚信风险防控机制研究”（NCZX2021-001）；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助科研诚信专项（2025TC019）。 |
| 作者 | 单位 | | 赵婉莹 | 1. 中国农村技术开发中心 北京 100045； | | 王立丽 | 1. 中国农村技术开发中心 北京 100045； | | 王璐瑶 | 1. 中国农村技术开发中心 北京 100045； | | 袁子晗 | 2. 中国人民大学信息资源管理学院 北京 100872；3. 首都师范大学图书馆 北京 100048； | | 赵勇 | 4. 中国农业大学图书馆 北京 100083 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 38 |
| 全文下载次数: 30 |
| 中文摘要: |
| [目的/意义]高质量的同行评议是遴选出高水平科技项目的重要前提，立项阶段的同行评议质量对科研经费资源配置具有重要影响。[方法/过程]基于2023 年8月至10月中国农村技术开发中心承接的农业农村领域8 个国家重点研发计划重点专项184 个项目评审数据，对比分析了拟立项与未立项项目的同行评议信度。[结果/结论]研究发现，所有项目的单个专家信度系数和整组专家信度系数均较高，拟立项项目的评分一致性普遍高于未立项项目，不同领域的信度系数存在差异。基于此本研究提出进一步明确评审标准、优化专家选择、重点关注异常值较多的领域、分析未立项项目异常值原因以及持续改进评审体系等政策建议，以期推动科技项目同行评议的科学化与规范化发展。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| [Objective/Significance] High-quality peer review is an important prerequisite for selecting high-level science and technology projects, the quality of peer review at the project initiation stage has an important impact on the allocation of scientific research funding resources. [Methods/Process] Based on the evaluation data of 184 projects from 8 types of national key R&D projects in the field of agriculture and rural areas undertaken by China Rural Technology Development Center from August to October 2023, this study compared and analyzed the peer review reliability of proposed projects and unapproved projects. [Results/Conclusions] It is found that the reliability coefficients of individual experts and the whole group of experts of all projects are high, and the scoring consistency of the proposed project is generally higher than that of the unapproved project,and the reliability coefficients of different fields are different. Based on this, this study puts forward policy suggestions such as further clarifying the review criteria, optimizing the selection of experts, focusing on areas with large outliers, analyzing the reasons for the outliers of uninitiated projects, and continuously improving the review system, so as to promote the scientific and standardized development of peer review of science and technology projects. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
