IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v26y2006i1p5-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific Peer Review to Inform Regulatory Decision Making: Leadership Responsibilities and Cautions

Author

Listed:
  • Dorothy E. Patton
  • Stephen S. Olin

Abstract

The article offers insights on the peer‐review process as it relates to scientific and technical reports used to inform regulatory decisions. Used effectively, peer review is a powerful tool for advising organizational leaders whether the scientific foundations of their decisions can be expected to withstand scrutiny as rule‐making products move through interagency reviews, public comment and stakeholder processes, congressional oversight, and judicial review. The emphasis is “heads up” rather than “how to.” That is, without delving into myriad technical and administrative details, the discussion highlights nine fundamental “leadership responsibilities” that determine the nature and course of peer review.

Suggested Citation

  • Dorothy E. Patton & Stephen S. Olin, 2006. "Scientific Peer Review to Inform Regulatory Decision Making: Leadership Responsibilities and Cautions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 5-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:1:p:5-16
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00727.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00727.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00727.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jacqueline Patterson & M. E. (Bette) Meek & Joan E. Strawson & Robert G. Liteplo, 2007. "Engaging Expert Peers in the Development of Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1609-1621, December.
    2. Gilbert S. Omenn, 2006. "Commentary on Scientific Peer Review to Inform Regulatory Decision Making: Roles and Perspectives of Scientists," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 37-39, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:1:p:5-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.