Research Grant Proposal Writing Margaret Devitt Research Management Unit.

Research Grant Proposal WritingMargaret Devitt

Research Management Unit

Know your Funder

Look at the website (www.hrb.ie)

Read the HRB Corporate Strategy ( 2007-2011) Mission and Objectives Vision and Values Targets, outcomes, performance indicators

“Improving People’s Health through Research and Information”

• Statutory body established by the Minister for Health under the Health (Corporate Bodies) Act 1961

• Amalgamation of the Medico-Social Research Board and the Medical Research Council of Ireland

• The statutory obligations of the Board include :– to promote, assist, commission or conduct health research to improve health and increase the effectiveness of the health services

– to maintain, develop or support health information systems for the purposes of research and to provide the evidence for health policy and services – to liaise and co-operate with other research bodies in the State and outside the State in the promotion, commissioning or conduct of relevant research – to liaise with other health information bodies in the State and where appropriate outside the State in the development and support of health information systems

Background to the Health Research Board

HRB Board and Organisational Structure • Amendment to the Statutory Instrument in July 2007 • Chair and 9 Board members nominated by Minister for Health • Term of office 5 years

• Staff compliment currently 70• Organisational review in 2006 - reorganisation of Divisions into

Directorates • Research & Information Systems Directorate • Research Strategy & Funding Directorate - Research Management Unit (combined R&D and RFPD) - Research Infrastructure and Special Initiatives Unit - Policy, Evaluation and External Relations Unit

• Project Grants• Translational Awards

• Partnership Awards• Health Services R&D Awards

• HRB/MRCG Awards• Global Health Research

Awards• Networking Grant for Global

Health Research

• Summer Studentships• Scientific Writing Workshop• Nursing and Midwifery Fellowships• Clinical Therapies Fellowships• Health Services Research

Fellowships• Clinical Research Training

Fellowships• Postdoctoral Fellowships• Nursing & Midwifery Junior

Clinician Scientist Awards• Clinician Scientist Awards• Cochrane Training • Cochrane Fellowships• Cancer Prevention Fellowships

Projects & Programmes Training/Career Development

Overview of HRB grant schemes

HRB Scientific Writing Workshops 2007

Objective : to provide training for young researchers in writing grant applications and papers for publication in medical and life science journals

• Call now closed • Next call in 2008• Applications made using the HRB eGrants system

• Two courses per year

Cork: 22 - 24 May 2007

Dublin: 10 - 12 October 2007

HRB Cochrane Training 2007

• Objective : to provide training in accessing and using the Cochrane Library

• Half-day introductory course if little or no previous experience

• Provides overview of evidence-based healthcare & principles and practice of Cochrane systematic reviews

• Two day training course covers systematic review methodologies and critical appraisal skills

• Suitable for those who require a more detailed knowledge of systematic reviews and if thinking of conducting a systematic review

• Courses are provided free of charge • Application based • Next call in 2008

Building Partnerships for a Healthier Society Research Awards

Scope: To provide funding for research projects and pilot studies in health and social care

Objective: promotion of partnerships to address research questions with strong relevance and impact on health policy and practice

Funding available: €40,000 pa for up to 2 years– Cover salary-related support (full time, part time, protected

time)/ consumables/dissemination costs and overheads (up to 30%)

Eligibility: – Lead applicant working in a recognised research institution/

health & social care agency ( HSE, hospital, voluntary service provider, GP)

– Co-applicants from Northern Ireland and abroad welcomed– Proposal relevant in the context of the National Health

Strategy and/or other health policy documents– Demonstrates a genuine multidisciplinary partnership

approach (research experience and the necessary insights)– Contribution of funding secured from one or more partners

Building Partnerships for a Healthier Society Research Awards

• Key points for partnership awards– Provides opportunities for individuals who do not have an

extensive research track record– Scoring assessed on applicant team as a whole

• Demonstration of Partnership is crucial– Individuals/ organisations in a meaningful synergistic

collaboration where each partner brings added value to the team

– Co-applicants (active) ensuring adequate relevant research skills

– Balance between academia and practice– Inclusion of patients/clients/ service users– Charities, support groups, voluntary bodies– Policy/practice: those whom the results will inform– Inclusion of any other stakeholders in the application (e.g.

advisory group or a group to disseminate to regularly)

• NOT a training/career development scheme• Next call early 2008

Research Project Grants

Objective: to support health related research, including biomedical and clinical sciences, public health, epidemiology, health services research, practice based research and translational research.

Eligibility: - Open to all researchers working in an established

academic research centre (i.e. a university/ teaching hospital/ institute of technology)- Also post-doctoral researcher without a post but have support of a Head of Dept/school.

Funding: Maximum awarded is €100,000 pa up to 3 years- €75,000 p.a. with a post-graduate student.

• 69 awards made in 2006 • Call closes on 02 November 2007

Health Service Research Fellowships

• Objective : to provide an opportunity for graduates in a health related disciplines to conduct research leading to a postgraduate degree at masters or doctoral level.

• Eligibility: - hold a primary or masters degree in a health

related discipline - Have relevant post grad research/ relevant

professional experience at least (3 yrs Masters & 5yrs PhD )

- have support from an approved Irish academic Dept

• Up to three years duration • Covers salary, consumables and travel grant up to €7,000• Call closes on Friday 12 October 2007

Nursing & Midwifery Research Fellowships

• Objective : provide nurses/midwives with and opportunity to conduct research & develop expertise as clinical specialists in their chosen field leading to a postgraduate degree at masters or doctoral level.

• Eligibility: - Registered as a nurse or midwife - Relevant professional experience at least (3 yrs

Masters & 5yrs PhD - Support from an approved Irish academic Dept

• Up to three years duration • Covers set salary, consumables and travel grant up to

€7,000• Call closed on June 11 2007

Clinical Research Training Fellowships • Objective : to provide medical doctors & dentists with an

opportunity to conduct research & gain specialised research training leading to a postgraduate degree at PhD level and support their development as independent academic investigators.

• Eligibility: - Registered as a doctor/dentist up to and

including Senior Registrar/ Lecturer level

- have support from an approved Irish Academic Dept

• Up to three years duration • Provides registrars salary scale with consumables and

travel grant up to €7,000• Call closes on 19 October 2007

HRB Post Doctoral Fellowships

• Objective : To enable researchers with a PhD to develop their research career in a health related discipline

• Eligibility: - Applicant must hold a PhD - Be actively involved in research - Have between 2-6 yrs post-doctoral experience

- Support from an approved Irish academic Dept • Up to three years duration • Covers salary, consumables and travel grant up to

€7,000• 8 Fellowships awarded in 2006• Call closed on 05 Oct 2007

• Scope: provide an opportunity for experienced therapy professionals to conduct research leading to a postgraduate degree at masters or doctoral level.

• Objective : to build/strengthen research capacity in the therapy professions and foster research which impacts on therapy practice

• Eligibility: - Hold a recognised qualification (or equivalent) in one of

six therapy professions- Practice background 5yrs PhD & 3 yrsMasters; - Working in or related to therapy practice in the Irish

health services or an appropriate Irish academic department - Registered with an appropriate Irish academic institution

- Supported by an academic sponsor and a suitably qualified therapy practitioner.

• 6 Fellowships awarded in 2006• Call closes on 26 October 2007

Research Fellowships for the Therapy Professions

Assessment Procedure

External Referees

HRBEligibility check&/or shortlisting

Applicant(s)PartnersProject

Peer review

Invite Application Form

NoveltyContribution to knowledgeFeasibilityDesign and methodology

Minimum of 2Specialist expertiseVast research experience

HRBGrant Committee

CollationRanking of average scoresShort-listing

10-15 peopleCover range of disciplinesAbreast of current medical, social and political developments

Lead and primary reviewersDebate and discussionConsensus ranking of scores

Recommendations to HRB Board

What reviewers look for (1)

An important research question – needs to be apparent from even a quick read of the application

Timeliness of the topic – e.g. key article in a journal editorial, recent guidelines produced, a target in a policy document. Show that it is an opportunity, that if not taken now, may be lost

A well presented application – suggests attention to detail. Poorly laid out or cluttered information will result in an important point being mislaid or misunderstood

An appropriate research method - clinical trial, case series, cross sectional surveys, cohort studies, case control studies, qualitative methodologies. All have their place but the one chosen must be most suitable for the stated research question

Methodological rigour* – always assume that the reviewers are appraising the application looking for a flaw. Search for them yourself by asking “where could it go wrong?”

* Methodological rigour (1)

Features of study design

Designing surveys The following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Is there a description of the population which will be sampled? Is the method of sampling described? random, cluster, stratified. Is the method of recruiting subjects described? Is the issue of representativeness addressed? Is there a strategy to minimise non-response? Is the method of collecting data described? Interview, postal

questionnaire etc Is an outline given of the data to be collected? Is the sample size justified? Is there a description of the statistical methods to be used?



Designing Cohort StudiesThe following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Is the study group clearly defined? Is the method of identifying and recruiting subjects described? Is the method of follow up described? Is the length of follow up justified? Is there a strategy to minimise losses to follow up? Is the outcome measure clearly defined, clinically relevant and

likely to be accurately measured? Is account taken of factors which could influence the outcome? Is the sample size justified? Is there evidence that the desired number of subjects can be

obtained? Is there a description of the statistical methods to be used?



Designing Case Control StudiesThe following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Are the cases clearly defined? Do the controls come from the same general population as the

cases? Is the method of recruiting cases and controls described? Is the method of collecting data described? i.e. interview or

postal questionnaire. Will data be collected in the same way for cases and controls? Is the sample size justified? Is there evidence that the desired number of cases and controls

can be obtained? Is there a description of the statistical methods to be used?



Designing Qualitative StudiesThe following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Is the theoretical basis of the study described? Is the method of data collection described? Is the role of the researcher discussed? Is it clear how the analysis will be performed? Does the person who will conduct the analysis have sufficient

experience?



Designing Economic EvaluationThe following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Is an economist mentioned in the proposal? Is the relevant economic theory described? Is the method of costing described? Is the source of the costing data identified? Is the health outcome measure described?



Designing Clinical TrialsThe following questions should be addressed in the protocol:

Is the patient group described? Is the method of recruiting study subjects described? Is there evidence that the required number of subjects can be

obtained? Are there procedures for obtaining informed consent? Is the method of randomisation described? Is the intervention clearly described? Is there a good argument why the intervention should work? Is the control treatment clearly described? Is the study double blind? Is the primary outcome measure clearly defined, clinically

relevant? Is account taken of factors which could influence the outcome? Is there a strategy to minimise losses to follow up? Is the sample size justified? Is there a description of the statistical methods to be used?


Feasibility – even if the method is perfectly worked out, this will not guarantee that the project will work in practice. Some additional questions: Can enough patients be recruited? Will I get cooperation from the professional groups involved? Can accurate data be collected? Can I achieve the study in the time stated with these resources?

Mention any pilot work that has demonstrated feasibility of parts of the study.

Researchers – CVs of the applicant(s) should be brief but carefully written. Get experienced researchers in as collaborators. Unsupported junior staff will find it difficult to get funding.

Implications of findings – often the part of the application form which receives the least attention. Even if all other parts are excellent, it is unlikely to be funded if implications are not clearly spelt out. Try to answer some of these questions:

Who will be directly affected by these findings (patient groups, health professionals)?What changes in health care delivery or service might follow from a successful study?How might improvement of health be obtained?How does the research fit in with national priorities?What contribution to fundamental knowledge comes from the study?Are there general principles underlying this study that have implications for other groups/patients?Could findings have implications for postgraduate medical/health education?Which professional groups might benefit from the findings?


Dissemination Address this even if not specifically asked for it. It is not enough to say that findings will be presented at meetings or published in journals. This is expected anyway.

Identify key organisations, stakeholders and/or professional groups who should be informed of the findings.Are local or regional workshops a good idea?Can local groups or newsletters play a role?Include all associated costs for this within the application.


Common Failings (1)

Despite the diversity, there is a relatively small number of reasons why applications are not funded

Uninspiring Project - those projects most inspiring are often those with national or

international implications. If a local study, still address the more far reaching consequences and learning.

Studies which gather masses of data but unclear of what new knowledge is being gained.

Studies in which answers to the research question are largely known (usually a poor literature review)

Don’t make reviewer search for reasons to fund your project. Avoid invoking the “so what” response.

Rambling descriptions - A concise but clear description – this is difficult!

Cobbled together work - Looks like it has been thrown together in a few days.

Common Failings (2)

Over Ambitious project - Project can have too many aims Projects can promise too many major changes Understand the differences between AIM and HYPOTHESIS Never assume your hypotheses are correct Do you have the necessary experience and/or resources to do the

study? Select a project which combines modest aims with clever ideas

Insufficient expertise - Not enough or not the right coapplicants

Inadequate resources - Support staff, laboratories, equipment, restricted access to

patients Ethics -

Lack of awareness of the issues or not addressed at all in the application

Strategies for Success (1)

Allow enough time “Written in haste, rejected at leisure” Set yourself own deadlines for first and second drafts

Follow the instructions Answer all sections Do not over run the stated length – do not decrease the font size

or mess with the margins to fit the text in! Begin writing!

Get ideas on paper at an early stage, especially for collaborative ventures

Start with the main features of the study design Write clearly

Avoid long sentences with many subclauses Avoid complex or convoluted phrases – translate into simple

english Explain technical terms Avoid jargon Avoid acronyms and abbreviations Spell and grammar check


Write with reviewers in mind Think of funders – eligibility, aim of the scheme, deadlines Think of expert reviewers and make sure it is methodologically

rigorous and the literature review is well done Think about the grant committee –some of these will not be

familiar with your area so write in a way that can be understood by non experts. Make sure to stress the policy and implications of your results.

Think of reviewers as intelligent specialists but who are from a different discipline

Explain why the study will succeed Theoretical basis is sound Important question to be answered Research design chosen is the best fit Study subjects can be adequately identified and recruited Data collection process is sound and you have statistical support


Seek advice From the funding body From colleagues Explaining your ideas can help you clarify things in your own mind Get someone who is unfamiliar with the project and area to

review it

Review the Layout Remember that your application will be among many others Use headings and subheadings wisely If a series of points being made or a set of data items beinbg

listed, use bullet points

Keep trying! Use the feedback wisely

Title should be short (12-15 words)requires more effort per word than any other section

Summary or Abstractshould be the last section you write

should provide a map of the whole application so needs to be carefully composedgenerally no more than 100-400 wordsmethodological detail should be avoidedintroduce topic and explain why research is neededstate main aim(s), expanding on information given in the titlegive brief detail of study method, nature and number of subjects and broad categories of dataindicate main findings expected and the implications which should flow from them

The Detailed Application (1)

Background to the studyThis is not about the personal odyssey which led to the applicationIt is the scientific background and rationale to the research studyOften starts with a statement such as “The number of people suffering from disease X is” or “ the cost to the health system per annum is”Should include a brief review of landmark studies and recent onesRefer to supportive and conflicting evidence relevant to the projectShould make the case for the need for research into this area by establishing the importance of this topic and highlighting the gaps in our present knowledge

Aims of the studySuccinct statement of what research project intends to find out

Deals with the purpose of the study, not the means

Reviewer will assume that if the applicant is in any way unsure of what they are looking for, they are unlikely to find anything


Methodology and DesignThis is the longest section of any application

The challenge is to provide sufficient information to be convincing without drowning the reader in an excess of technical detail

Even if not asked, split in into a number of subsections:

Overview

Prepare the reader for what is to come

“If a grant applicant wrote murder novels, few bookstores would stock them because they’d give away the ending in the opening paragraph”

What are you going to do?

How will you do it and when?

Statement of the results you expect


Methodology and Design (contd.)Study Subjects

Patients or health professionals

Criteria used to select them (age, gender etc)

Any diagnostic criteria

Any exclusion criteria

Subject recruitment process

Data to be collected

List data and how each item will be measured

Do not want entire proforma if there is a questionnaire involved but also not enough to say that one will be developed

Any equipment needed for physical measurements, analytical techniques needed for biochemical measurements

Cite methodolological papers if appropriate


Methodology and Design (contd.)Study Procedures

Deals with the logistics of the study

How will subjects be identified, accessed and recruited

Sampling methodologies

Interviews

Follow up procedures

Data Analysis

Only limited detail of the statistical techniques needed (chi squared, non parametric, cox proportional hazards, Nudist, SPSS)

Should flow from the study design and the specification of the data to be collected

If statistical analysis is extensive in the study, get a statistician as a co-applicant

Sample size calculation vital – seek advice


Methodology and Design (contd.)References

Summarise the references succinctly as reviewers will NOT have the time to retrieve and read all of them

Cite in a consistent and standard format e.g. Vancouver style is the most common – references are cited in the text using sequential numbers and listed in numerical order in a reference list – this minimises space, which is at a premium in this section

Timetable of Work

Information on timings and milestones can be summarised as a table or as a flow diagram, indicating the activity and the time in months

Don’t forget the time until decision – when can the project team start, if the grant is awarded? When can you free up research staff, recruit staff, begin a part-time arrangement etc?


Methodology and Design (contd.)Existing facilities

Expected that office space and furniture will be supplied

Specialised equipment?

Computer, printer, hardware, software

Does host institution have supports such as clerical support to offer?

Supervision

Need to state how many hours per week principal applicant intends to spend supervising or supporting the project, if not the researcher themselves

Only requires a number on the form BUT will be very carefully assessed


Methodology and Design (contd.)Justification of costs

Personal support

Research staff

Equipment

Patient related expenses

Materials and consumables

Access charges and overheads

For each person to be employed, a brief but explicit statement of their tasks should be included

Describe appropriate salary scales

If going for a more experienced researcher, state why this is needed

Highlight what you and other partners are contributing ( in-kind?)

Detail why part time or full time arrangements and how this will happen


Methodology and Design (contd.)CVs

Should include name, qualifications, current post (seniority and area of expertise) and any relevant publications

Reviewers expect new applicants to have less preliminary data, resources and publications. They are looking more at potential than achievement. You should balance this by increasing the biographical information in the application

Show that the application has the right combination of necessary experience (clinical, research, statistical, health economist or other)

Ask yourself the questions:

Do I come across as being independent and able to lead?

Do I appear to have the support of my institution?

Have I got a range of collaborators to fill the gaps in my experience?


Methodology and Design (contd.)Impact

What are the impacts of the findings on health and social care

If there is no heading for this, make sure to add it in

Will it carry across much wider areas of health care and beyond the confines of this project?

Have I approached any of the stakeholders it might have an impact on down the line? Are they willing to endorse this study? Have they said they would act on it? If so, can I fit this in somewhere in the application?


Research Governance Framework

Ethical Issues Good Research Practice Intellectual Property Data Protection and confidentiality Indemnity issues

Progress Reports and Final Reports Database of funded research and progress

Rules around publications and acknowledgements Auditing arrangements, where appropriate

Get writing……and good luck!

[email protected]

Improving people’s health through research and information

Research Grant Proposal Writing Margaret Devitt Research Management Unit.

Documents

Transcript of Research Grant Proposal Writing Margaret Devitt Research Management Unit.