Most federal

regulatory agencies A regulatory agency (regulatory body, regulator) or independent agency (independent regulatory agency) is a government authority that is responsible for exercising autonomous dominion over some area of human activity in a licensing and regulati ...

in the

United States The United States of America (U.S.A. or USA), commonly known as the United States (U.S. or US) or America, is a country primarily located in North America. It consists of 50 states, a federal district, five major unincorporated territori ...

government must comply with specific

peer review Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work ( peers). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer revie ...

requirements before the agencies publicly disseminate certain scientific information. These requirements were published in a Peer Review BulletinFederal Register Notice: text of Peer Review Bulletin
Feb 22, 2002. issued by the

White House The White House is the official residence and workplace of the president of the United States. It is located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C., and has been the residence of every U.S. president since John Adams in ...

Office of Management and Budget The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is the largest office within the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP). OMB's most prominent function is to produce the president's budget, but it also examines agency programs, pol ...

(OMB), which establishes "government-wide standards concerning when peer review is required and, if required, what type of peer review processes are appropriate."

Bulletin

OMB's peer review bulletin requires that US federal regulatory agencies submit all "influential scientific information" to peer review before the information is publicly disseminated. The Bulletin defines "scientific information" as:

factual inputs, data, models, analyses, technical information, or scientific assessments related to such disciplines as the behavioral and social sciences, public health and medical sciences, life and earth sciences, engineering, or physical sciences.

This Bulletin defines "influential scientific information" as

scientific information the agency reasonably can determine will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector decisions. In the term 'influential scientific information,' the term 'influential' should be interpreted consistently with OMB's government-wide information quality guidelines and the information quality guidelines of the agency.

As noted in the preceding quotation, the Bulletin must be read in conjunction with "OMB's government-wide information quality guidelines and the information quality guidelines of the agency." These guidelines govern the quality of all information disseminated by most US government regulatory agencies. These guidelines are required by a US statute enacted in 2001 called the

Data Quality Act The Information Quality Act (IQA) or Data Quality Act (DQA), passed through the United States Congress in Section 515 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (). Because the Act was a two-sentence rider in a spending bill, it had no name give ...

and also known as the Information Quality Act ("IQA"). OMB states that it prepared the peer review Bulletin pursuant to OMB's authority under the IQA. The peer review Bulletin provides detailed guidelines for peer review of influential scientific information. The Bulletin applies more stringent peer review requirements to "highly influential scientific assessments,"

which are a subset of influential scientific information. A scientific assessment is an evaluation of a body of scientific or technical knowledge that typically synthesizes multiple factual inputs, data, models, assumptions, and/or applies best professional judgment to bridge uncertainties in the available information.

Comparison

The peer review Bulletin's specific guidelines differ in several respects from traditional peer review practices at most journals. For example, the Bulletin requires public disclosure of peer reviewers' identities when they are reviewing highly influential scientific assessments. The Bulletin's summary of some of these requirements is set forth below:

In general, an agency conducting a peer review of a highly influential scientific assessment must ensure that the peer review process is transparent by making available to the public the written charge to the peer reviewers, the peer reviewers' names, the peer reviewers' report(s), and the agency's response to the peer reviewers' report(s). ... This Bulletin requires agencies to adopt or adapt the committee selection policiesPolicy and Procedures on Committee Composition and Balance and Conflicts of Interest for Committees Used in the Development of Reports
at National Academies site employed by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

The peer review Bulletin specifically addresses the effect of publication in a refereed scientific journal as well the variations and limitations with peer review:

Publication in a refereed scientific journal may mean that adequate peer review has been performed. However, the intensity of peer review is highly variable across journals. There will be cases in which an agency determines that a more rigorous or transparent review process is necessary. For instance, an agency may determine a particular journal review process did not address questions (e.g., the extent of uncertainty inherent in a finding) that the agency determines should be addressed before disseminating that information. As such, prior "peer review and publication is not by itself sufficient grounds for determining that no further review is necessary.

References

United States Office of Management and Budget Peer review