1 / 16

Archived File

Archived File. The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated. See the OER Public Archive Home Page for more details about archived files. Review of Non-Hypothesis-Testing Research.

birch
Download Presentation

Archived File

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Archived File The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated. See the OER Public Archive Home Page for more details about archived files.

  2. Review of Non-Hypothesis-Testing Research Elliot Postow, PhD Director, Division of Biologic Basis of Disease

  3. Proposals that are not Hypothesis Driven • Clinical Research • Design-Directed/Developmental Research • Health Policy-Motivated Studies • Instrument/Methods Development • Resource/Database Creation • Curiosity-Driven Science • Discovery-Driven Research • Hypothesis-Developing Research

  4. From an NIAID Website

  5. NEW REVIEW CRITERIA SIGNIFICANCE:Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods,technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventionsthat drive this field? INNOVATION: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area? INVESTIGATORS: Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?

  6. Working Group on Review of Bioengineering and Technology- and Instrumentation-Development Research(Huntsman Committee) • to identify the obstacles to fair, high-quality, rigorous review • develop a set of principles to guide CSR in establishing a review infrastructure that will fairly evaluate interdisciplinary research • committee's report is available at: http://www.csr.nih.gov/bioopp1/select.htm

  7. Findings and Recommendations The current organization and composition of study sections does not facilitate identification of all types of promising projects. • there are no regular study sections to serve as a home for broadly applicable technologies. Sometimes interdisciplinary applications, including those in bioengineering and technology and instrumentation development, are a small minority of those being reviewed in a given study section; hence the perception is that such applications are disadvantaged. • In contrast, much of bioengineering research, rangingfrom biomaterials to clinical devices to biological modeling, is reviewed in one study section along with surgery-related applications. In such a construction, it is very difficult to achieve the breadth of technical expertise necessary to review incoming applications. • cluster technology applications in specially created scientific review groups • create IRGs designed to review -- in their methodological context -- applications that are related to broadly applicable technologies.

  8. Panel on Scientific Boundaries of Review (PSBR) • PSBR recognized bioengineers and developers of technology and instrumentation as a research community that feels disadvantaged by the NIH peer review process and addressed those concerns. • PSBR report is available at: http:/www.csr.nih.gov/events/summary012000.htm

  9. Bioengineering Sciences and Technologies [BST] The BST IRG reviews grant applications that focus on fundamental aspects of bioengineering and technology development in: • gene and drug delivery systems • imaging principles for molecules and cells • modeling of biological systems • bioinformatics and computer science • statistics and data management • instrumentation • chips and microarrays • biosensors • biomaterials.

  10. Surgical Sciences, Biomedical Imaging, and Bioengineering [SBIB] The SBIB IRG reviews grant applications that address topics at the interface between a physical science or engineering and biomedical or clinical research. Bioengineering areas include: • development of molecular probes and contrast agents • development of molecular imaging techniques • design and development of medical imaging systems • application of computational sciences to knowledge and information in bio- and clinical medicine and healthcare and their integration • development of biomedical sensing and measurement instrumentation; diagnostic instrumentation; biologics; materials; processes; implants; devices; and informatics approaches to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease

  11. Bioanalytical Engineering & Chemistry Special Emphasis Panel [BECM] BECM reviews grant applications in: • micro- and nano-fabrication • biophysical and analytical technology development • methods and instrument/device development for detecting, identifying, and quantifying compounds of biomedical interest Musculoskeletal Tissue Engineering Study Section [MTE] MTE reviews grant applications for tissue engineering and related implant and other regenerative system and device-development projects that focus on the replacement or repair of damaged, missing, or poorly functioning musculoskeletal tissue.

  12. Health of the Population Study Sections These study sections review grant applications that: • consider characteristics of the distribution of diseases/conditions (including incidence, prevalence, morbidity and mortality) in relation to time, place, and personal characteristics • determine the impact of risk factors or protective factors on the progression or outcome of diseases/conditions • test the efficacy of interventions to prevent or modify health risk behaviors • study socioenvironmental influences on health, behavior, and development

  13. CSR Review of Bioengineering ApplicationsPre- and Post-PSBR * About half are bioengineering applications

  14. Bioengineering Program Announcements • PA-01-049 Single Molecule Detection and Manipulation • PA-02-003 Neurotechnology Research, Development, and Enhancement • PA-02-011 Bioengineering Research Grants • PA-02-141 Biology Software • PAR-03-106 Innovation in Biomedical Computing Science and Technology • PA-04-006 Neurotechnology Research, Development, and Enhancement

  15. Review of Bioengineering Applicationsin other than Bioengineering Study Sections

  16. “ I was gratified to be able to answer promptly. I said I don’t know.”Mark Twain

More Related