English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper describes the development of a model for making project funding decisions at The National Cancer Institute (NCI). The American Stop Smoking Intervention Study (ASSIST) is a multiple-year, multiple-site demonstration project, aimed at reducing smoking prevalence. The initial request for ASSIST proposals was answered by about twice as many states as could be funded. Scientific peer review of the proposals was the primary criterion used for funding decisions. However, a modified Delphi process made explicit several criteria of secondary importance. A structured questionnaire identified the relative importance of these secondary criteria, some of which we incorporated into a composite preference function. We modeled the proposal funding decision as a zero-one program, and adjusted the preference function and available budget parametrically to generate many suitable outcomes. The actual funding decision, identified by our model, offers significant advantages over manually generated solutions found by experts at NCI.

A Model for Making Project Funding Decisions at the National Cancer Institute