research proposal: writing and style - fraser health proposal: writing and style ... research...
TRANSCRIPT
11
Research Proposal: Writing and Style
© Fraser Health Authority, 2012
The Fraser Health Authority (“FH”) authorizes the use, reproduction and/or modification of this publication for purposes other than commercial redistribution. In consideration for this authorization, the user agrees that any unmodified reproduction of this publication shall retain all copyright and proprietary notices. If the user modifies the content of this publication, all FH copyright notices shall be removed, however FH shall be acknowledged as the author of the source publication.
Reproduction or storage of this publication in any form by any means for the purpose of commercial redistribution is strictly prohibited.
This publication is intended to provide general information only, and should not be relied on as providing specific healthcare, legal or other professional advice. The Fraser Health Authority, and every person involved in the creation of this publication, disclaims any warranty, express or implied, as to its accuracy, completeness or currency, and disclaims all liability in respect of any actions, including the results of any actions, taken or not taken in reliance on the information contained herein.
Magdalena Swanson, MScResearch & Grant Development FacilitatorEvaluation & Research [email protected]
Department of Evaluation and Research Services‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Library | Education | Administration | Development
Objectives
1. Understand the basic criteria that define a good research proposal and grant application
2. Understand the key components of a grant budget
3. Become aware of effective writing styles
The purpose of a research proposal
The purpose of a research proposal is to:
convince a reviewer/funder to entrust $$$
communication tool to present to others
create a sound plan to follow
apply for ethics approval
http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com
Research Proposal Sections
Introduction
Background
Previous work / preliminary data
Study justification
Study significance
Overview
Research Proposal Sections
Research Question & HypothesisAims / Objectives
SMART: SpecificMeasurableAchievableRelevantTime-bound
Research Proposal Sections
*Methodology*
study design
subjects: recruitment, sampling
data collection
data analysis
Research Proposal Sections
Alternate approaches
Considerations
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com
Research Proposal Sections
Response to previous review
Team (qualifications + roles)
Knowledge dissemination plan
Research environment
Future plans
Research Proposal Sections
Timeline
References
Appendices
tables
figures
data collection tools
Other Research Application Components
Letter of Intent / Registration
Cover letter
Forms + signatures
Abstract / lay summary
Other Research Application Components
Budget
Budget justification
CVs / resumés
Ethics approval
Other Research Application Components
Letters of support
Letters of collaboration
Attachments
published papers
sample consent forms
In more detail…
Background
Context for problem
Statistics
Literature reviewcompleteness relevance to research plan
Should support study justification
TimelineWhat you will do and when
http://www.uwgb.edu/research/PreparingaProposal
KT Plan
Conference presentation or poster
Publishing
Meetings / workshops / educational events
Promotional / educational video
Website content
Policy, guidelines, procedures
KT Plan
Who should hear your message?
Letters of Support
Make each different and personal
Describe the problem the research project would address and its importance
State how the research project addresses priorities: FH, BC gov’t, associations…
Specifically state what support will be provided
BudgetMatching research activities to $$$
Budget Components
Research Personnel
Research Assistant
Research Coordinator
Statistician
Clinician
Budget Components
Research PersonnelTrainees
Undergraduate student / Co-op student
MSc, MPH, MA, PhD, PharmD student (etc.)
Clinical student
FTE rate + benefits x # hours
Budget Components
Applicant Time
rarely can applicant time be paid for
usually, applicants are not paid salaries
some agencies will pay backfill
Budget Components
ServicesHealth records
Microbiology lab
Pharmacy
Decision support
Printer
Budget Components
ServicesSurvey company
Statistician
Facility rental
Honoraria
Catering
Budget Components
Supplies / EquipmentOffice supplies (research related)
Medical supplies (research related)
Postage
Digital recorder
Laptop
Budget Components
Travel: Conference, team meetings, etc
http://www.grouptravelspecialist.com.au
Budget PreparationA spreadsheet is helpful
$ requestedFunding from other sources TOTAL
n salary benefits total cash in-kindPersonnelResearch Assistant 1 49000 11760 60760 0 0 60760
Summer student 1 5950 0 0 0 5950 5950
Servicesvideo development 9000 0 0 9000
web posting 500 0 500 1000
catering 2700 0 0 2700
Suppliesoffice material 1200 0 1200 2400
long distance (interviews) 0 0 200 200
interlibrary loan 240 0 0 240
$74,400.00 $ 7,850.00 $82,250.00
Budget JustificationExplanation & Rationale
eg) Research Assistant
$55,353 ($55,800 salary at 0.8 FTE plus 24% benefits)
A research assistant is requested at .80 FTE for the one year duration of the funding. The assistant will be responsible for subject recruitment, data collection, and maintenance of the research studies database.
This individual will be supervised by the PI.
The scope of this position demands a trained individual with significant experience in the coordination of research. A Master’s degree is preferred.
Signatures
Principal Applicant(s)
Co-applicants
Institutional
Financial officer
Signatures: FH Research Policy
Applicant
Applicant’s Director
VP Medicine or designate
http://research.fraserhealth.ca/
Meaning of Signatures
FH Research Policy• the applicant is eligible to apply• the applicant has sufficient space and
resources to do the research• if an award is made, FH is able and willing to
administer the funds on behalf of the granting agency in accordance with the guidelines of the granting agency
• if an award is made, the awardee agrees to abide by the award regulations of the granting agency
Meaning of Signatures
FH Research Policy• if an award is made, FH will not release
funding to the awardee until all award conditions of the granting agency and the FH have been met, including regulatory requirements
• if an award is made, the awardee will use the award only for the purposes for which the award was made
• if an award is made, the awardee will notify FH Research and the granting agency if there is any change in their status that affects the award
Meaning of Applicant Signatures
CIHRAgrees to assume responsibility for the legal and
ethical conduct of the research, for the integrity of the research activities and reported data, and for communicating the results of the research recognizing the contributions of other persons working on the project
Meaning of Institutional Signature
CIHRHe or she is authorized to bind the institution
The institution agrees with the content of the application and will provide the committed resources
Meaning of Institutional Signature
CIHRThe institution will provide grant-holders with the
necessary time to do their research
The institution agrees to comply with CIHR's data protection requirements and has adequate safeguards in place to protect sensitive information
Meaning of Institutional Signature
CIHRThe institution agrees to the public release of a
summary of the grant and to the publication of the organization's name as a supporter of the initiative
A word about format
http://homepages.sover.net
Team Methods Budget Forms Proposal Signatures
Application Deadline
CVs Letters
1
23
4
Red numbers = critical path to obtain signatures (a draft of the
proposal is sufficient)Asterisk = time to complete task very often underestimated
photocopying / mailing
* *
*
Literature ReviewTi
me
Give Yourself Time
Don’t wait for funding announcement to develop research plan and team
Short notice on many RFAs
Anticipate 3x the expected time
Workshop Activity - Budgetn salary benefits TOTAL
Personnel
Services
Supplies / Equipment
Workshop Activity - Letter
Letter of Support
Internal person
External person
http://static.open.salon.com
Cannot succeed without great content
Readability also important
Leonardo da Vinci
Audience
Keep the audience in mind
what is their area of expertise?
what is their level of expertise?
Audience
Keep the audience in mind
busy + tired people
make it easy for them
4 Cs
ClearConciseCorrectCompelling
Clarity
http://www.cgu.edu/images
Clarity: First Page
Short introductory paragraph
problem, statistics (= justification)
Goal
Hypothesis, Research Question
Objectives / Aims
Significance
Clarity: Proposal
Headings
Spell out abbreviations 1st time
Avoid long sentences
Get to the point
Transitions between paragraphs e.g. however, moreover, in addition to, conversely…
Concise
Avoid a brain dump: ‘need to know’ vs ‘nice to know’
Organize with headings and subheadings
Use graphics
Figures
Graham, I. D. et al. (2006) J Contin Educ Health Prof, Vol. 26, No. 1
Figures
A B C D
Figures
http://www.nysdra.org
Figures
15%
5%
15% 15%
Research plan
Statistical plan
Spelling and grammar
*Read guidelines in detail
Correct
Highlight: SignificanceFeasibilityInnovationQualifications
Compelling
Read the review criteria
Ensure all review criteria are addressed
Make review criteria items easy to spot
Compelling
State how your research addresses priorities
funderyour institutiongovernmentadvisory groupshealth / professional associations
Compelling
Abstract
First page
Be careful with clever titles
Put the most important sentences at the beginning and the end of paragraphs
Compelling
Use serif font for proposal text
Use sans-serif for figures + tables
Font size 12 (unless figure/table)
Leave 1’’ margins
Style
abcd
abcd
Use only left justification
Use max 2 highlighting styles together
Be consistent with formatting
Style
Leave white spaceavoid pages of wall-to-wall text
Don’t make lists in sentences • use bullets
Use a formal tone
Don’t use ‘I’
Style
Try to get your hands on examples
Style
Iterative process
First draft: don’t self-edit
After 1st or 2nd draft, get content feedback
Later drafts, clean up spelling, grammar, flowemploy non-expert readers
Writing & Editing
Do an outline
Write the abstract last
Write the background second last
Writing & Editing
Start small
Don’t get discouraged
It’s a learning curve
http://rlv.zcache.com
73%
55%
16%
58%
ApproachInvestigatorOtherProblem
University of Michigan Proposal Writer's Guide by Don Thackreyhttp://www.research.umich.edu/proposals/PWG/pwgrejected.html?print
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Problem (58 percent)
The problem is not of sufficient importance or is unlikely to produce any new or useful information (33.1)
The proposed research is based on a hypothesis that rests on insufficient evidence, is doubtful, or is unsound (8.9)
The problem is more complex than the investigator appears to realize (8.1)
The problem has only local significance, or is one of production or control, or otherwise fails to fall sufficiently clearly within the general field of health-related research (4.8)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Problem (58 percent)
The problem is scientifically premature and warrants, at most, only a pilot study (3.1)
The research as proposed is overly involved, with too many elements under simultaneous investigation (3.0)
The description of the nature of the research and of its significance leaves the proposal nebulous and diffuse and without a clear research aim (2.6)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Approach (73 percent)
The proposed tests, or methods, or scientific procedures are unsuited to the stated objective (34.7)
The description of the approach is too nebulous, diffuse, and lacking in clarity to permit adequate evaluation (28.8)
The overall design of the study has not been carefully thought out (14.7)
The statistical aspects of the approach have not been given sufficient consideration (8.1)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Approach (73 percent)
The approach lacks scientific imagination (7.4)
Controls are either inadequately conceived or inadequately described (6.8)
The material the investigator proposes to use is unsuited to the objective of the study or is difficult to obtain (3.8)
The number of observations is unsuitable (2.5)
The equipment contemplated is outmoded or otherwise unsuitable (1.0)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Investigator (55 percent)
The investigator does not have adequate experience or training for this research (32.6)
The investigator appears to be unfamiliar with recent pertinent literature or methods (13.7)
The investigator's previously published work in this field does not inspire confidence (12.6)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Investigator (55 percent)
The investigator proposes to rely too heavily on insufficiently experienced associates (5.0)
The investigator is spreading himself too thin; he will be more productive if he concentrates on fewer projects (3.8)
The investigator needs more liaison with colleagues in this field or in collateral fields (1.7)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
Other (16 percent)
The requirements for equipment or personnel are unrealistic (10.1)
It appears that other responsibilities would prevent devotion of sufficient time and attention to this research (3.0)
The institutional setting is unfavorable (2.3) Research grants to the investigator, now in force, are
adequate in scope and amount to cover the proposed research (1.5)
Why Proposals Get Rejected
The Methodology Unit is on the case!
Never Fear