How are Ancillary Studies reviewed?

The review committee will evaluate the following:

• Add Health justification – The proposal should leverage the strengths of Add Health as a nationally representative population-based study of health. Biospecimen specific studies should also plan to cover the full sample of available biospecimens at a given Wave, where possible. If including all samples in a Wave is not feasible or appropriate, this must be justified. All proposals should be consistent with the policies of Add Health and minimize burden and risk to Add Health participants. The resulting data should add value to the study and benefit the user community.
• Importance of research – What is the significance, rationale, and scientific justification for the study?
• Approach – The scientific quality of the proposed work. Is the approach rigorous and feasible? Can the study be done well in the proposed timeframe?
• Expertise and resources – Are the investigators (and laboratory partners if applicable) sufficiently qualified to conduct the study and can their environments support the proposed work?
• Impact on repository (biospecimen studies only) – Does the study propose parsimonious use of biospecimens? What impact will the use of the samples have on the remaining volume and sample size available in the Current Use reserve?
• Laboratory justification (biospecimen studies only) – If not using our partner laboratory (LCBR), is justification provided? Does the alternate laboratory follow best practices for monitoring and controlling assay data quality, and use conventional tools (e.g., negative/positive controls, calibration standards)?

For further information on our review of Ancillary Study Proposals, please see our Contextual Study Researcher Guidelines or Biospecimen Study Researcher Guidelines.