Section outline

  • Lecture: NIH Reviewer Insights for Training Grants

    Faculty:  Katie Stone

    Location (Access restricted to registered students):  Zoom URL

    • Discussion: Workshop time / open questions

    • Assignment 10, due 1 pm, 3/17: Peer review of assigned proposals. In 1-pg (bullet points ok), address the following:

      (1)   Aims: Will the aims, if accomplished, move the candidate towards a long-term research career? Is the scope of the aims appropriate for the candidate’s level (either PhD or fellow)?

      (2)   Significance: Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

      (3)   Innovation (for K-writers): Show how proposed research is new and unique, e.g., explores new scientific avenues, has a novel hypothesis, and will create new knowledge. Explains how project's research can refine, improve, or propose a new application of an existing concept or method. If showing how the research can shift a current paradigm (more difficult claim to make): make a very strong case for challenging the existing paradigm; have data to support the innovative approach; and have strong evidence that you can do the work.

      (4)   Approach: Do the methods appear to be sound? Is the research feasible? Are there potential pitfalls that need to be discussed?

    • Reading: None this week