Participation in advisory, standards, or other governmental or nongovernmental committees. Researchers may contribute to a wide range of committees, such as advisory committees, ethics or oversight committees, or topic-specific subcommittees. Participation is often voluntary, but sometimes paid, and can be a significant time commitment in addition to regular scientific activities.
Through participation in expert committees, researchers can contribute to recommendations for a range of levels, including operations of institutions, grant funding, device manufacture, and drug regulation.
Advice from authors on searching for information:
Data sources provided here are only a few examples of local, federal, and discipline-specific committee types. Committee lists are often found in the “Governance” sections of websites.
Resources & Data
Organizations, repositories, websites, and other sources where you can find more information:
- American Society of Hematology. ASH has several scientific committees that set research and policy agendas and identify research opportunities.
- National Institutes for Health. The NIH Center for Scientific Review houses study sections that review research grant applications submitted to NIH. Study sections are tightly focused to ensure adequate expertise from peer reviewers (i.e., AIDS Molecular and Cellular Biology, Pathobiology of Kidney Disease, etc.). The NIH also has many councils and federal advisory committees on which scientists serve.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has several topic-specific advisory committees whose members are experts in their field. Members serve on panels to provide recommendations. Committees include medical devices, patient engagement, pediatrics, and tobacco products.
Challenges you may encounter while searching for information:
Websites vary in the degree to which they make the list of committee members public, and if so, whether the list is current. Direct contact with the institution may be required.
Articles, books, and other publications in translational science using the indicator:
- Atici EA, Erdemir AD. Ethics in a scientific approach: The importance of the biostatistician in research ethics committees. J Med Ethics. 2008 Apr;34(4):297-300. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019349.
- Kendler KS. A history of the DSM-5 scientific review committee. Psychol Med. 2013 Sep; 34(9): 1793-1800. doi: 10.1017/S0033291713001578.
- McComas KA, Tuite LS, Sherman LA. Conflicted scientists: The “shared pool” dilemma of scientific advisory committees. Public Underst Sci. 2005 Jul; 14(3): 285-303. doi: 10.1177/0963662505052891.
- Tan CE, Kyriss T, Glantz SA. Tobacco company efforts to influence the Food and Drug Administration-commissioned Institute of Medicine Report Clearing the Smoke: An analysis of documents released through litigation. 2013;10(5):e1001450. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001450.