the nih review process l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 117 Views
  • Uploaded on

THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS. David Armstrong, Ph.D. Chief, Scientific Review Branch National Institutes of Mental Health National Institutes of Health Department of Health and Human Services. Applications Submitted to NIH.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS' - page


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
the nih review process
THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS

David Armstrong, Ph.D.

Chief, Scientific Review Branch

National Institutes of Mental Health

National Institutes of Health

Department of Health and Human Services

applications submitted to nih
Applications Submitted to NIH
  • Approximately 80,000 grant applications are submitted to NIH each year of which 25-30% are funded.
  • Grant applications are received for three review cycles per year
dual review system for grant applications
Dual Review System for Grant Applications
  • First Level of Review
    • Scientific Review Group (SRG)
      • Provides Initial Scientific Merit
      • Review of Grant Applications
      • Rates Applications and Makes Recommendations for Appropriate Level of Support and Duration of Award

Second Level of Review

Council

  • Assesses Quality of SRG
  • Review of Grant Applications
  • Makes Recommendation to
  • Institute Staff on Funding
  • Evaluates Program Priorities
  • and Relevance
  • Advises on Policy
slide5

The NIH Grant Process

WOW!

What a

great idea

Investigator initiated research is core

to the NIH grant process

research plan
RESEARCH PLAN
  • What do you intend to do?
  • Why is the work important?
  • What has already been done?
  • How are you going to do the work?
slide7

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

SF424

Writing a grant

application can be

very time consuming

January/February

June/July

October/November

slide8

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Soon all grant applications

will be received electronically

Center for Scientific Review

receiving center

slide9

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Individual

Research

Grant

Serial

number

Amended

1 R01 MH 123456 01 A1

Institute

Grant

Support

Year

New

Application

CSR’s x-ray security

facility

slide10

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Just ten

more reviewers

to recruit

and the roster

is complete.

Just 5 more

reviewers to

recruit

Scientific Review

Administrator

Reviewer

scientific review administrator
Scientific Review Administrator

Designated Federal official with overall

responsibility for the review process, including:

  • Performing administrative and technical review of applications to ensure completeness and compliance
  • Selecting reviewers based on broad input
  • Managing study section meetings
  • Preparing summary statements
  • Providing any requested information about study section recommendations to Institutes and National Advisory Councils/Boards
slide12

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Finished!

This is hard

work.

Critique

IAR

slide13

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

First level of review

Score (100-500)

Human subject concerns

Inclusion criteria

Vertebrate animal concerns

Budget

review criteria
REVIEW CRITERIA

1. Significance

2. Approach

3. Innovation

4. Investigator

5. Environment

review criteria continued
Review Criteria (continued)
  • Significance:Does the study address an important problem? How will scientific knowledge be advanced?
  • Approach: Are design and methods well-developed and appropriate? Are problem areas addressed?
  • Innovation:Are there novel concepts or approaches? Are the aims original and innovative?
  • Investigator: What is the investigator’s track record? If new, is the investigator appropriately trained?
  • Environment: Does the scientific environment contribute to the probability of success? Are there unique features of the scientific environment?
slide16

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Summary statement

eRA

Scientific Review

Administrator

summary statement
SUMMARY STATEMENT
  • Overall Resume and Summary of Review Discussion
  • Essentially Unedited Critiques
  • Priority Score and Percentile Ranking
  • Budget Recommendations
  • Administrative Notes
slide18

The NIH Grant Process (cont)

Wow a

166 – Will

I get paid?

Second level of review

National Advisory Mental

Health Council

slide19

Yippee!!

Now I only

have to worry

about getting

tenure.

when preparing an application
When Preparing an Application
  • Read instructions
  • Never assume that reviewers “will know what you mean”
  • Refer to literature thoroughly
  • State rationale of proposed investigation
  • Include well-designed tables and figures
  • Present an organized, lucid write-up
  • Obtain pre-review from faculty at your institution
common problems in applications
Common Problems in Applications
  • Lack of new or original ideas
  • Absence of an acceptable scientific rationale
  • Lack of experience in essential methodology
  • Questionable reasoning in experimental approach
  • Uncritical approach
  • Diffuse, superficial, or unfocused research plan
  • Lack of contingency plan
  • Lack of sufficient experimental detail
  • Lack of knowledge of published relevant work
  • Unrealistically large amount of work
  • Uncertainty concerning future directions
revising applications
Revising Applications

Most applicants don't succeed at first try -- so they try again

- You can resubmit up to two amended applications

- You can use reviewer comments to amend your application

- 43% of applications initially submitted to NIH in 1999 were eventually funded (includes all amendments)

slide23

www.nimh.nih.gov

David Armstrong 301-443-3534

armstrda@mail.nih.gov