How to Structure the “Approach” Section of a Grant Application (Filler 2020)
0 likes147 views
The document outlines the review criteria for evaluating scientific research proposals, focusing on methodology, potential weaknesses, and plans for ensuring rigor. It emphasizes the importance of preliminary data, consideration of biological variables, and the presentation of potential pitfalls and future directions of the research. The layout suggestions help ensure clarity and coherence in presenting the project's aims and anticipated outcomes.
How to Structure the “Approach” Section of a Grant Application (Filler 2020)
- 1. Approach (Basic Science) Scott G. Filler, M.D. Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center sfiller@ucla.edu
- 2. Approach: Review Criteria • Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? • Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? • Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed?
- 3. Approach: Review Criteria • Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? • If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? • Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
- 4. Approach--Overall Layout • Preliminary data • Aim 1 o Rationale and overall approach o Experimental methods o Anticipated results o Alternative outcomes (potential pitfalls) o Future directions • Aim 2 o Rationale and overall approach o Experimental methods o Anticipated results o Alternative outcomes (potential pitfalls) o Future directions
- 5. Approach--Alternate Layout • Aim 1 o Preliminary data o Rationale and overall approach o Experimental methods o Anticipated results o Alternative outcomes (potential pitfalls) o Future directions • Aim 2 o Preliminary data o Rationale and overall approach o Experimental methods o Anticipated results o Alternative outcomes (potential pitfalls) o Future directions
- 6. Preliminary Data • Present compelling preliminary data o Supports premise of the work o Demonstrates feasibility o Sparks interest, but leaves reviewer wanting to learn more • Potential pitfalls in preliminary data o Clear weaknesses o No statistical analysis o Supports alternative hypothesis
- 7. Approach • Describe overall approach and the controls • Only mention key details • Need power calculations for animal studies o Many details of animal studies can be move to Vertebrate Animals section • Address sex as a biological variable
- 8. Approach • Rigor and Transparency o Strong scientific premise (Significance) o Scientific rigor (Approach) • Blinding, sample size, reducing bias o Consideration of relevant biological variables, such as sex (Approach) • Include animals of both sexes if feasible o Authentication of key biological and/or chemical resources (separate page)
- 9. Approach • Potential pitfalls o One aim depend on another * o Excessive detail • Detracts from overall message • Target for criticism o Densely written prose “If reading a grant gives the reviewer a headache, that grant is unlikely to receive a good score”
- 10. Anticipated Results and Potential Pitfalls • What do you think the results will be? • Creativity and flexible thinking very important • Interesting alternative outcomes • What if hypothesis is not supported? • Never present a potential pitfall for which you don’t have a good solution
- 11. Future Directions • Where is your research going? • What will be its impact? • How can the specific information learn be applied to a broader question?