Brian Locke

Grant Proposals

"PHS 398" -> google gives DHHS instructions (sometimes updated)

Examples: NIH reporter website shows funded grants. - https://reporter.nih.gov/

Abstract Page

Distilled information summarizing the specific Aims section

Specific Aims Section (often limited to 1 page)

Introduces info for significance, innovation, and approach criteria of the overall score.

  • State goals of research, expected outcomes, impact of research on the field
  • List specific objectives: e.g. test hypothesis, create design, solve specific problems, challenge existing paradigm, address critical barrier, or develop technology. (Note: active verbage - NOT about the method of achieving those objectives). -specific Hypotheses: do not state as a null hypothesis statement (cumbersome)- instead, how you would propose it to colleagues. -public health statement: the "why you should care"

Must have information about: hypothesis, design, population, and measurable study outcomes.

Schematic for the section: MDCRC 6450

  • WHY: "This first block is a paragraph with some brief background, setting up the problem. Research has shown A, B, and C but studies have limitations and X, Y, and Z are not well understood. This knowledge would be significant because...". Should be brief (a paragraph). -HOW: "An even shorter paragraph on how you propose to solve the problem. To address this question, we propose a [name of study design] study examining [exposure of interest, measured how] in [who are the study subjects]. We will compare [outcome, ascertained how] in order to address the following hypotheses and specific aims:" Should be even briefer (1-2 sentences, do not talk details of methods).
  • WHAT: Aims part -
  • Hypothesis statement- scientific hypothesis, cause-and-effect language OK, e.g. X is a cause of Y. Not "null hypothesis" language
  • Aims statement- What you will actually do with your study data. Common language is to compare, to describe, to examine, to evaluate.
  • WHAT: (for each aim include a hypothesis statement and aims statement)
  • SO WHAT: "Statement of public health significance (worded differently from above) e.g. results of this study will be useful to whom, to inform what decisions." - briefly loop back around to rationale. This will be covered in depth later. Less technical language of "what will be different once we know this information".

Generally, be conservative about causal statements In AIMS for observational research - err'ing on the side of description - though hypotheses can include causal language.

Revise Aims often:

  • Draft specific aims first, before writing the rest of the grant.
  • this way, the rest of the grant will be explicitly addressing the aims, which is crucial.
  • then revise the aims as you complete the other sections of the grant (as you note mismatches or gaps between methods, justification, and the aims)
  • keep it simple.

Types of Grants

https://researchtraining.nih.gov/career/early-career

Scoring Criteria And Review Process

Write your proposal targeted toward the readers: the reviewers at the study section. Generally 3 reviewers assigned based on content of application, expertise of reviewer, suggestions of PI or program staff. Members with conflicts are excused. Initial enthusiasm stated (1-9), and triage to non-discussed pile is possible. Then a primary reviewer explains the projects, strengths, and weaknesses. Then other reviewers follow. Open discussion with the full panel then occurs. Re-state enthusiasm (1-9). Finally, members vote.

Note: that the whole panel votes on the score, but only a few (1-3) have read the grant in depth - the rest may read abstract/specific aims only. Thus, the ease and clarity with which the primary reviewers can summarize and justify the research influences the score.

Often, each reviewer will have 2-3 grants to fully read, 6-8 grants to 'discuss' (ie. Read only stated aims / abstract). Don't assume reviewers will all know the lingo, look things up, grasp nuances, or see the unstated - make it simple for them.

Scoring Rubric:

  • Candidate (e..g your track record, support)
  • Proposed career development (if applicable)
  • Research plan. (Criteria: innovation, approach)
  • Mentors/Co-mentors, Consultants, Collaborators
  • Environment of institution

Approach

Goal of this section is to describe the overall research.

SIgnificance - can either address each aim specifically, or collectively for all of the aims.

Innovation - can either address each aim specifically, or collectively for all of the aims.

Approach (this is the most important section - will get most of the attention): how will the data be collected, analyzed, and interpreted in order to achieve your aims. EACH aim needs to be addressed. Need a data analysis plan for each aim.

Note: you will need to justify a power calculation for many studies. Thus, need to either collect or estimate each of the variables in the power calculation to estimate the feasibility of your approach.