American University of Beirut
Faculty of Health Sciences
Research Committee
Evaluation of Research Proposals
Reviewer: ______________________________________________________________
Title of Proposal:_________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
Investigator:_____________________________________________________________
Department:_____________________________________________________________
Please write your evaluation of the proposal according to the items listed below. You may send us
your review by electronic mail to Dr. Abla Sibai.
Thank you
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
1. Research question: Is the statement of the problem clear enough to be summarized? Is there a
well-defined rationale (theoretical/practical) for undertaking the study?
2. Originality/State of the art: Is the study novel in terms of approach or theory? Does the
proposal reflect command of current body of knowledge in the field?
3. Theoretical framework/Literature review: Does the problem ‘sit’ within a conceptual
framework or theory? Does the research question build on previous research? Is review of the
literature selective (critical)? Are major concepts clearly defined? Are hypotheses (if any)
clearly stated?
01/07/2016
FHS_RC
4. Research design: Is the design adequate given the stated problem? Are methods of data
collection, sampling procedures, method of evaluation/analysis clearly identified? Are they
suitable? Any discussion regarding reliability/validity of measures selected (if appropriate)?
5. Significance/Importance: Does investigator identify the significance of the problem? Is the
statement convincing? Usefulness for policy/intervention and/or public health? Significance to
the field? Potential for publications?
6. Ethical/Political considerations: Any discussion of ethical issues – if relevant? IRB review?
7. Feasibility: Are the plans realistic/achievable? Does investigator have access to data and/or
subjects? Is timetable realistic? (For internal reviewers) Does investigator have necessary
competence/experience to undertake the study?
8. Budget: Is budget about right (i.e., reasonable), given the purpose of the study? Is it itemized?
9.
General comments:
Overall evaluation: Please give an overall score for this proposal by circling one number (1 to 10)
on the scale below.
(Low) 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 (High)