NIH Study Section Review Process

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How a Study Section works
Advertisements

How Your Application Is Reviewed Robert Elliott, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
What’s NIH? National Cancer Institute National Eye Institute National Heart, Lung, and Blood Inst. National Human Genome Research Inst National Institute.
NIH Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) R15 AASCU November 5, 2009 Mary Ann Guadagno, PhD Office of Extramural Research National Institutes of Health.
Laurie Tompkins, PhD Acting Director, Division of Genetics and Developmental Biology NIGMS, NIH Swarthmore College May 14, 2012 NIH 101.
California State University, Fresno – Office of Research and Sponsored Programs Basics of NIH – National Institutes of Health Nancy Myers Sims, Grants.
How Your Application Is Reviewed Vonda Smith, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
American Evaluation Association EVALUATION 2011 November 3, 2011 Approaches to Biomedical Research and Development Portfolio Analysis: Examples From the.
How to get funded from the National Institutes of Health Minda R. Lynch, Ph.D., Chief Behavioral and Cognitive Science Research NIDA.
Weathering the Storm: How to Establish and Sustain an Independent Research Career in an Era of Limited Funds Lawrence J. Prograis, Jr., M.D Senior Scientist,
NIH Regional Seminars 2014 Sally A. Amero, Ph.D.Dana Plude, Ph.D. NIH Review Policy OfficerBiobehavioral and Behavioral Processes IRG National Institutes.
The Life Cycle of an NIH Grant Application Alicia Dombroski, Ph.D. Deputy Director Division of Extramural Activities NIDCR.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute James P. Kiley, Ph.D. National Heart,
How to Improve your Grant Proposal Assessment, revisions, etc. Thomas S. Buchanan.
NIH OBSSR Summer Institute July 2012 National Institutes of Health U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Overview of the NIH Peer Review Process.
NIH Regional Seminars 2015 Sally A. Amero, Ph.D.Dana Plude, Ph.D. NIH Review Policy OfficerBiobehavioral and Behavioral Processes IRG National Institutes.
THE NIH REVIEW PROCESS David Armstrong, Ph.D.
Short Overview of the NIH SBIR/STTR Program “Lab to Life”
1 CRCHD-sponsored Professional Development and Mock Review Workshop June 23, 2014 NIH Funding Opportunities, Grant Applications, and Recent Changes Christopher.
Working with NIH Program Officials: Pre-Award & Post-Award Shawn Gaillard, NIGMS and Francisco Sy, NIMHD 2013 NIH Regional Seminar, Baltimore, MD.
Peer Review of NIH Research Grant Applications Center for Scientific Review National Institutes of Health.
Office of the Director National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism National Institute of Arthritis.
Avrom Caplan, PhD Associate University Dean for Research
NIH Review Procedures Betsy Myers Hospital for Special Surgery.
The Review of Your NIH Grant Application Begins Here Richard Nakamura, Ph.D. Director NIH Center for Scientific Review.
American Evaluation Association EVALUATION 2009 November 14, 2009 Building Data Systems to Support Evaluation in a Biomedical Research and Development.
The Grant Renewal Review Process Nywana Sizemore, PhD Scientific Review Officer Molecular Oncogenesis - MONC Oncology I - Basic Translational - OBT Integrated.
The NIH Grant Review Process Hiram Gilbert, Ph.D. Dept. of Biochemistry, Baylor College of Medicine Xander Wehrens, M.D. Ph.D. Dept. of Molecular Physiology.
National Institutes of Health. Much of the biomedical research in the United States is supported by the Federal Government, primarily the National Institutes.
Jo Anne Goodnight NIH SBIR/STTR Program Coordinator NIH Mission Improve human health through biomedical and behavioral research, research training and.
NIH Grant Renewal Review Process (and Beyond)
NIH Mentored Career Development Awards (K Series) Part 5 Thomas Mitchell, MPH Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics University of California San Francisco.
NIH Peer Review Process – Grant Renewal
Center for Scientific Review (CSR). Office of the Director National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and.
An Overview of Peer Review at CSR – Critical Do’s and Don’ts Joy Gibson, D.Sc. Director, Division of Translational and Clinical Sciences American Association.
BME 301 Lecture Twenty-Three. How are health care technologies managed? Examples: MRI Laparoscopic cholecystectomy Vitamin C treatment for scurvy Research.
NIH F-32 Application Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for Individual Postdoctoral Fellowships
1 Preparing an NIH Institutional Training Grant Application Rod Ulane, Ph.D. NIH Research Training Officer Office of Extramural Research, NIH.
The Search for a “Better Way:” Reauthorization of the National Institutes of Health Elias A. Zerhouni, M.D., Director, NIH July 19, 2005 House Energy and.
The NIH Funding Process Peggy McCardle, PhD, MPH Child Development & Behavior Branch National Institute of Child Health & Human Development We wish to.
NIH Peer Review Process – Grant Renewal Angela Y Ng, MBA, PhD Scientific Review and Referral Officer Center for Scientific Review NCI DCB New Grantee Workshop.
NIH Grant Writing Tips Kelli A. Komro, MPH, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, COM Associate Director, Institute.
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
An Insider’s Look at a Study Section Meeting: Perspectives from CSR Monica Basco, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer Coordinator, Early Career Reviewer Program.
The Role of a Program Director NCI Division of Cancer Biology New Grantee Workshop October 18-19, 2010 Jerry Li, MD, PhD Division of Cancer Biology NCI/NIH.
Funding Opportunities for Investigator-initiated Grants with Foreign Components at the NIH Somdat Mahabir, PhD, MPH Program Director Epidemiology and Genetics.
Office of Research Support.  Departmental Grant Manager – Enters information into SPS.  Sponsored Projects System (SPS) is where Grant Managers can.
NIH Regional Seminars 2015 Sally A. Amero, Ph.D.Weijia Ni, Ph.D. NIH Review Policy OfficerChief, RPHB, Center for Scientific Review National Institutes.
Organizational Funding Portfolios and Beyond: Assessing the Full Research Landscape Panel Session 731 American Evaluation Association EVALUATION 2012 October.
Michael Sesma, Ph.D. National Institute of Mental Health Early Stage Investigators and the Program Perspective.
Peer Review and Grant Mechanisms at NIH What is Changing? May 2016 Richard Nakamura, Ph.D., Director Center for Scientific Review.
Rigor and Transparency in Research
How to get funded from the National Institutes of Health Minda R. Lynch, Ph.D., Chief Behavioral and Cognitive Science Research NIDA.
Jeanne McDermott, PhD,MPH,CNM Program Officer Division of International Training and Research Fogarty International Center National Institutes of Health.
NIH Update Maria Skinner, OSP Manager (NIH Lead) Laura Johnston, OSP Asst. Director January 7, /7/2016.
NIH HIV/AIDS Research Priorities
Understanding NIH Peer Review
American Evaluation Association
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
The Influence of Domain-Specific Metric Development on Evaluation and Design: An Example from National Institutes of Health Technology Development Programs.
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
NIH GRANT PREPARATION WORKSHOP: A workshop for new investigators about putting together administrative portions of a grant and the NIH review panel. Tuesday,
The NIH Peer Review Process
The NIH Peer Review Process
Rick McGee, PhD and Bill Lowe, MD Faculty Affairs and NUCATS
Writing that First Research Grant
When and How to Talk to Project Officers Part II
Peer Review of NIH Research Grant Applications
NIH Peer Review Pedro Delgado, MD.
The NIH Peer Review Process
Presentation transcript:

NIH Study Section Review Process Paul Jacobsen, PhD; Associate Director Healthcare Delivery Research Program, NCI Hazel Nichols, PhD; Assistant Professor, Department of Epidemiology, UNC

Shriver National Institute National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases National Cancer Institute on Drug Abuse of Environmental Health Sciences on Aging Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders National Eye National Human Genome Research of Mental Health of Neurological Disorders and Stroke of General Medical Sciences of Nursing Research National Library of Medicine Center for Scientific Review National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine of Allergy and Infectious Diseases John E. Fogarty International Center for Research Resources Clinical Center Minority Health and Health Disparities National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Office of the Director Information Technology National Heart, Lung, and Blood of Dental and Craniofacial Research of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases NIH is the largest source of funding for medical research in the world, creating hundreds of thousands of high-quality jobs by funding thousands of scientists in universities and research institutions in every state across America and around the globe. NIH is made up of 27 Institutes and Centers, each with a specific research agenda, often focusing on particular diseases or body systems. More than 80% of the NIH's budget goes to more than 300,000 research personnel at over 3,000 universities and research institutions. In addition, about 6,000 scientists work in NIH’s own laboratories, most of which are on the NIH main campus in Bethesda, Maryland. The main campus is also home to the NIH Clinical Center, the largest hospital in the world totally dedicated to clinical research. 2

NIH Grant Process Investigator Grantee Institution NIH Initiates Research Idea and Prepares Application Conducts Research Investigator Submits Application Manages Funds Grantee Institution NIH Center for Scientific Review (CSR) Assigns to Scientific Review Group (SRG) and Institute Institute Makes Funding Selections & Issues Grant Awards SRG Evaluates for Scientific Merit Institute Evaluates for Program Relevance and Need National Advisory Council/Board Recommends Action

NIH Funding Mechanisms Academic Career Award (K07) Mentored Clinical Scientist Short-Term Training (T35) Development Award (K08) Small Business Grants (R41, R42, R43, R44) Conference Grant (R13) Marc Fellowships (F34, F36, T34) Academic Research Enhancement Award (R15) Minority Biomedical Support Grant (S06) Biomedical Research Support Shared Instrumentation Grant (S10) Resource Grant (P40, P41, R24, R26, R28) Research Project Grant (R01) Developmental/Exploratory Grant (R21) Small Grant (R03) Program Project Grant (P01) Predoctoral Fellowship (F31) Postdoctoral Fellowship (F32) Center Grant (P30, P50, P60) Senior Fellowship (F32) Institutional Fellowship (T32) Fogarty International Center Fellowship (F05, F06) Research Scientist Development (K01) Pathway to Independence (K99/R01)

Understanding NIH Peer Review

WHAT HAPPENS IN A STUDY SECTION MEETING? Closed to the public (Program officials may observe) Orientation Conflict of interest Developments of interest to the study section Changes in policy or procedure Introduction of persons present Role of persons present Applications reviewed in ascending order of mean initial impact score (best to worst), until about 50% are scored. The rest are unscored. Application by application discussion Persons with conflicts of interest excused Assigned reviewers give preliminary scores Discussion of application’s scientific and technical merit Assigned reviewers first, then other members Range of scores Every member scores every application Assignment of gender, minority, and children codes, human subjects codes; recommended changes to budget Video

Review Criteria Significance: Does the study address an important problem? How will scientific knowledge be advanced? Investigator: Is the investigator qualified? Innovation: Are there novel concepts or approaches? Are the aims original and innovative? Approach: Are design and methods well-developed and appropriate? Are problem areas addressed? Environment: Does the scientific environment contribute to the probability of success? Are there unique features of the scientific environment? Overall Impact: Assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved

Scoring Scale Happy Days are Here Again! Pop the Bubbly! Cautious Optimism Borderline. In striking distance for resubmission. Not very good. Pretty Bad. Awful. Oh, the Humanity!

New Guidelines to Enhance Rigor and Transparency Scientific premise Scientific rigor Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources

Rigor and Transparency Scientific premise State the strengths and weaknesses of published research or preliminary data crucial to your application Scientific rigor Describe how your experimental design and methods will achieve robust and unbiased results

Rigor and Transparency Scientific premise Scientific rigor Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables Vertebrate animal and human studies Explain how biological variables are factored into research design and provide justification if only one sex is used

Does the study Involve vertebrate animals or humans?

Rigor and Transparency Scientific premise Scientific rigor Consideration of Sex and other Biological Variables Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources Includes, but not limited to, cell lines, specialty chemicals, antibodies, non-standard laboratory reagents. Discussed after scoring

Calculations Priority Score: Mean of all reviewers’ Overall Impact scores X 10, rounded to whole number. Percentile: Percentile rank of application compared to the pool of the last three review cycles of that study section. (Low percentiles are better.)

Summary Statement After the review meeting is finished, the results are documented by the SRA in a summary statement and forwarded to the PI and to the assigned NIH Institute. The assigned NIH Institute is responsible for making a funding decision. The summary statement contains: Overall Resume and Summary of Review Discussion Essentially Unedited Critiques of Assigned Reviewers, including their scores in the 5 categories Priority Score and Percentile Ranking Budget Recommendations Administrative Notes

What Determines Which Awards Are Made? Scientific Merit Program Considerations Availability of Funds

A little vocabulary Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOA) Program Announcement (PA) Indicates that the institute would like to fund research in this area, but you must go through the regular application process. There are two special types of PAs: PAR—applications are reviewed by an Institute or a special Center for Scientific Review committee PAS—PA with set-aside funds. Request for Applications (RFA) Indicates that the institute has set aside funds for research in this area. May have a special due date and study section. Investigator Initiated Application Not in response to specific PA or RFA. That’s OK, use general, omnibus PA.

NIH Early Career Reviewer Program Goals Develop qualified scientists without prior CSR experience into well-trained reviewers Help emerging researchers advance their career by exposing them to a peer review experience to make them more competitive applicants Enrich the pool of NIH reviewers by including those from less research-intensive institutions https://public.csr.nih.gov/reviewerresources/becomeareviewer/ecr/pages/default.aspx

NIH Early Career Reviewer Program To Qualify 2 years as a faculty member or similar researcher role. Postdocs are not eligible. Evidence of an active research program. At least 2 senior author (first, last, single, or corresponding) research papers in the last 2 years. Have not served on a CSR study section. Current funding not required. https://public.csr.nih.gov/reviewerresources/becomeareviewer/ecr/pages/default.aspx

NIH Early Career Reviewer Program To Apply Full CV in word or as pdf NIH Commons ID Select 4 CSR Study sections https://internet.csr.nih.gov/ECRV2/ECRMain.aspx

Questions? Acknowledgements Heidi Sahel Cheryl Thompson Thomas Brandon