“to excel, according to internationally accepted standards of scientific excellence in the...
Post on 18-Dec-2015
223 views
TRANSCRIPT
“To excel, according to internationally accepted standards of scientific excellence in the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products and a strengthened Canadian health care system…”
Section 4, C-6, R.S.C. 2000
ObjectiveObjective
Four Research Themes
• Biomedical
• Clinical
• Health services and health systems
• Health of populations, societal and cultural dimensions of health, and environmental influences on health
13 CIHR Institutes
Aboriginal People’s Health
Cancer Research Circulatory and
Respiratory Health Gender and Health Genetics Health Services and
Policy Research Aging
Human Development, Child and Youth
Infection and Immunity Musculoskeletal Health
and Arthritis Neurosciences, Mental
Health and Addiction Nutrition, Metabolism
and Diabetes Population and Public
Health
Biomedical - Clinical - Health Services and Health Systems - Health of populations, societal and cultural dimensions of health, and environmental influences on health
Clinical Psychology Social Work Nursing Anthropology Sociology Etc
Health Services and Health Systems
Economists Political Scientists Sociologists Geographers Ethics Etc
Health of populations, societal and cultural dimensions of health, and environmental influences on healthIn addition to all mentioned
Performing Arts Religious Studies Linguistics Music Regional Sciences Philosophy Literature History Etc.
CIHR Supports
Investigator-initiated research proposals
Any area of health research
Open competitions
Strategic Research Initiatives
Priority areas chosen by Institutes
Requests for applications
Applying for a Grant Important Deadlines
Program Registra-tion
Deadline Adjudica-tion
Notifica-tion
Funding start
Operating
Grants
Aug. 15 Sep. 15 Dec. End Jan. Apr. 1
Feb. 1 Mar. 1 May End June Oct. 1
Request for Applications (RFA) Important Deadlines
Program Registra-tion
Deadline Adjudica-tion
Notifica-tion
Funding start
RFAsApril 1 June 1 Nov-Dec January 15 Feb
Nov 1 Jan 15 May-June June 15 July
Applying for a grant: Being a Principal InvestigatorApplying for a grant: Being a Principal Investigator
Appropriate training and publications Protected time for research Space and facilities
If not Be a collaborator in an existing team or Find an experienced and established
investigator to help you Explore the Institutes’ Request for
Applications
Applying for a grant Writing:Applying for a grant Writing:
Competition is tough: only 1 in 4 applications is funded!
Start at least 4 months before deadline Application should be completed 1
month before deadline Show it to experienced colleagues for
feedback (mentorship!) Revise, revise, revise
Applying for a grant Writing: in 11 pages explain
Applying for a grant Writing: in 11 pages explain What you want to do
central hypothesis/research question: the big ideaplus specific objectives (or aims)
Why this is a reasonable thing to do review of previous work by you and others,succinct rationale for project (concept and
approach)
Why this is important significant new knowledge to be obtained improvements to health which will result
Applying for a grant. Writing: in 11 pages explain
Applying for a grant. Writing: in 11 pages explain How you are going to do it
detailed work plan, logical sequence and timelinesmethodologies, analysis and interpretation of
resultspitfalls, ways around them, alternatives
Why you should do it relevant prior experience and skillscollaborators for technical gapspreliminary data showing feasibility
Applying for a grant Writing: on budget pages explain
Applying for a grant Writing: on budget pages explain What you need to do it
suppliespersonnel (research assistants, trainees, interviewers)
- named, if possibleequipment, database accessservices (photography, computing) travel to present findings, or for collaboration
Don’t ask forsalary for applicants infrastructure costs (space rental, heat, light, furniture,
regular telephone service, secretarial support, etc.)
Follow instructions exactly Adhere to format guidelines, e.g., font
size, margins, page limits, etc. Write the summary and key hypothesis
and rationale sections for generalists, detailed work plan for specialists.
It should be a pleasure to read Proof-read! Proof-read! Proof-read!
Follow instructions exactly Adhere to format guidelines, e.g., font
size, margins, page limits, etc. Write the summary and key hypothesis
and rationale sections for generalists, detailed work plan for specialists.
It should be a pleasure to read Proof-read! Proof-read! Proof-read!
Help yourself: Do not upset the reviewersHelp yourself: Do not upset the reviewers
Peer Review CommitteesPeer Review Committees 45 for operating grants (currently) Over 600 volunteers Composition for Grants committees:
ChairScientific Officer8-12 members
Review 30-70 applications over 2-3 days, twice a year.
Some Peer Review Committees
Biological and Clinical Aspects of Aging
Social Dimensions of Aging
Children’s Health Ethics and Law and
Humanities Humanities
Perspectives on Health Gender Sex and Health
Health Information and Promotion Research
Knowledge Translation Public Community and
Population Health Psychosocial, Socio-
Cultural and Behavioral Determinants of Health
Clinical Trials
Peer Review Committees (things to do when applying)
You will be asked to suggest external reviewers. To prepare read the guidelines regarding Conflict of Interest.
You will be asked to choose the peer review committee. To prepare, read the mandates on the Web site
Operating Grants – Peer Review Process
Committee officers make final selection of review panel
If necessary, additional expertise obtained by inviting extra members in person or via teleconference, and/or external reviews
Peer Review Process – cont.Peer Review Process – cont.
Chairs and Scientific Officers play a major role in all facets of the peer review Ensure the balance of expertise, regional, gender and linguistic
representation Review applications and assign to external reviewers who provide written
reviews to the committee Assign applications to two internal reviewers who provide oral and written
reports and an initial rating and to a third as a reader Internal reviewers give a preliminary rating and their reports.
Members discuss application (20-30 minutes) Internal reviewers reach consensus on rating and members rate
privately (.5 higher or lower) No one on the Committee knows the final rating.
Budget then discussed and recommended
Evaluation criteriaEvaluation criteria
Proposal Clear, testable hypothesis or central research problem originality and innovation in concept or approach soundness of methodology (ies) significance and relevance to health feasibility of work plan, usefulness of results knowledge of the field (cited literature)
Applicant(s) relevant experience productivity and reputation appropriate to stage of career supportive environment
Rating ScaleRating Scale Range Descriptors
4.5 - 4.9 outstanding4.0 - 4.4 excellent3.5 - 3.9 very good3.0 - 3.4 solid/significant
__________________________________2.5 - 2.9 needs revision2.0 - 2.4 needs major revision1.0 - 1.9 seriously flawed0 not acceptable
Feedback to applicantFeedback to applicant
External and internal reviews (anonymous), plus Scientific Officer’s summary of discussion
Read and take advice (from reviewers’ reports and colleagues)
If not funded, can re-apply to next competition 2 pages of rebuttal to explain how reviewers were
wrong, or right…. and how their concerns have been addressed
Contact CIHR Research Portfolio staff if you have any questions
For more advice
Hyperlinks to Grantscraft guides:
http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/publications/funding/
usefullinks_grants_e.shtml
For :
• Current RFA opportunities
• Grants and Awards Guide
• Database of funded research
• Peer review process in detail
• Application forms
• Staff contacts for assistance of any sort
• Toll-free number 1-888-603-4178
Visit us often at www.cihr-irsc.gc.caVisit us often at www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca