1 / 18

The ultimate scientific challenge: How to write a research proposal

The ultimate scientific challenge: How to write a research proposal. Dianna A. Johnson, Ph.D. Professor emeritus Department of Ophthalmology, UTHSC. Science is the search for ideas. Ideas represent more than just facts or observations

omer
Download Presentation

The ultimate scientific challenge: How to write a research proposal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The ultimate scientific challenge: How to write a research proposal Dianna A. Johnson, Ph.D. Professor emeritus Department of Ophthalmology, UTHSC

  2. Science is the search for ideas • Ideas represent more than just facts or observations • Ideas are mental constructs that connect facts and observations into potential hypotheses or questions: : “What if…..?” • This is the heart of the ultimate scientific challenge • Finding answers to scientific questions can be relatively easy; finding the initial question is the hard part.

  3. Attributes of great ideas • New – totally new or more realistically, new in some important aspect. • Testable • Results should be useful • Results should be amenable to incorporation into; add to our greater body of scientific knowledge (Don’t just sing in the shower.)

  4. Attributes of great thinkers • They are often young • Risk takers • Create new tools, new ways of thinking, find new connections • Apply old techniques to new problems • Apply new techniques to old problems

  5. Your new idea(s) will define your scientific career • Testable hypotheses represent the product, the currency of scientific research • Create the hypothesis; experimentally test the hypothesis; interpret the results; apply this new discovery to improve current understanding • Your findings are never final; they represent the best possible answer for the moment – to be improved upon in the next round of scientific investigation. • Hallmarks of good science: creative ideas, demanding and thorough experimental testing, thoughtful interpretation, integration of findings into current scientific body of knowledge

  6. Step I: Get a brilliant idea • It is up to you. • Study, listen, ask for advice, read, analyze other brilliant ideas • The idea has to be yours, otherwise you will not reach the ultimate goal of being an INDEPENDENT PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR. • A PI is responsible for “ the idea”.

  7. Step 2: Garner resources you have and those you will need to pursue your idea • Space – labs, existing data sets, clinical settings • Equipment • Experimental animals, clinical trials, computer programs • Collaborations – letters of support, commitments • Institutional approval and support

  8. Step 3: Who funds the kind of research you want to do • Hospitals • Corporations • Drug companies • Philanthropic organizations • Educational organizations • Start-up companies, private investors

  9. NIH funding is the gold standard • Because of the NIH’s long-standing record of rigorous and fair review, an NIH grant can lead to: • A faculty position • Access to high level collaborators • Invitations to meetings • The accolade of being an INDENDENT PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR

  10. WHICH NIH INSTITUTE?

  11. The NIH RO1 Grant Proposal: A conversation with 2 experts in your field • Peer review: Although the study section may consist of more than a dozen funded investigators in various areas of research, and each has one vote; you must win over the assigned reviewers, usually 2 individuals who are experts in your field. • The overall judgement of the assigned reviewers will be reflected in scores given your proposal in 8 different areas, plus an overall “impact” score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved. The impact score determines your chances of funding.

  12. Scored Review Criteria • 1. SIGNIFICANCE: address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field; improve scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice; change the concepts; drive this field. • 2. INVESTIGATOR(S): well suited to the project; appropriate experience and training; ongoing record of accomplishments. • 3. INNOVATION: utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions

  13. Scored review criteria (continued) • 4. APPROACH: well-reasoned and appropriate; robust and unbiased approach; potential problems, alternative strategies; benchmarks for success • 5. ENVIRONMENT.  contribute to the probability of success; adequate for the project proposed • 6. RESOURCES: appropriate resources to conduct the research, such as adequate equipment and laboratory space

  14. Scored criteria (continued) • 7. INDEPENDENCE AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: appropriate experience and training; institutional commitment (start-up funds, technician) • 8. COLLABORATORS AND CONSULTANTS: Most scientific work requires collaboration among researchers, and NIH is dedicated to fostering such relationships; spell out roles of collaborators. USE THESE PHRASES IN WRITING EACH SECTION OF YOUR PROPOSAL SO THAT REVIEWERS CAN MORE EASILY FIND RELEVANT INFORMATION UPON WHICH TO BASE THEIR EVALUATION OF YOUR PROPOSAL.

  15. Are You a New or Early Stage Investigator?  • A Program Director / Principal Investigator (PD/PI) who has completed their terminal research degree or end of post-graduate clinical training, whichever date is later, within the past 10 years and who has not previously competed successfully as PD/PI for a substantial NIH independent research award. • ESI applications with meritorious scores will be prioritized for funding. • NIH offers funding opportunities tailored to new investigators, such as the NIH Director's New Innovator Award.

  16. ESI (CONTINUED) • identify yourself as a new investigator because reviewers are instructed to give special consideration to new investigators • Reviewers will give greater consideration to the proposed approach of an ESI proposal, rather than the track record of the PI • First-time applicants may have less preliminary data and fewer publications • HOWEVER: ESI proposal must demonstrate true independent of any former mentors; that you have resources and institutional support, ability to independently carry out the research

  17. Additional tips from nih • Make Your Project’s Goals Realistic (#1 criticism of new proposals : too ambitious) • Be Organized and Logical – make it easy on the primary reviewers • Write in Clear Concise Language – make it easy for non-experts to understand   • Sell Your Idea – Make the case for why NIH should fund your research • Edit and share for comments – ask colleagues to provide ”trial review”

  18. Funding of a first submission is unusual • Apply for R01 as soon as reasonable for you to do so • Apply to other funding sources on a continuing basis in order to gain some level of funding, some exposure to other review communities, and practice in writing proposals

More Related