slideuri mcs 2014.pptx

8/15/2019 slideuri mcs 2014.pptx

1/156

Scientif

cWritingA step-by-step guide


2/156

Publish in English orPERISH

The simpletruth...

Publishing is the major

marker o productiit!in academia


3/156

The scientifc

manuscript

For every person who reads the whole paper,about 500 read only the title so...

...catch the eye of prospective readers

Title


4/156

The scientifc manuscript

"sk !oursel

What is the single most important pointmade in this paper?

Title


5/156


"dice

se short, declarative sentences rather thanneutral sentences

Infuence o aspirin on human megakaryocyte prostaglandin synthesis

Inhibition o prostaglandin synthesis as amechanism o action o aspirin-like drugs(Nature)

Title


6/156


"dice

se verbs instead of abstract nouns forthe sa!e of dynamics

Treatment o polycystic ovary syndrome

How to treat polycystic ovary syndrome

Title


7/156


"dice

Avoid abbreviations Ocs o-t-c? "The Lancet #

Oral contraceptives over-the-counter?

$mit all waste words because inde%ingand abstracting services depend on theaccuracy of the title

Title


8/156


"dice

&f the study is of a particular species,name it in the title

"e.g., narrative review, randomi'ed control trial#

#heck the targeted journal

Title


9/156


"dice

(he main words in the running title shouldbe identical to words in the main title

#heck the targeted journal

RunningTitle


10/156


Rules to be ollo$ed (o facilitate the inde%ing of published

papers, supply a list of the !ey words thatre)ect the most important aspects of yourpaper

"dice #heck the targeted journal

%e!$ords


11/156


Rules to be ollo$ed

&t should not be longer than speci*ed in the&nstructions for Authors

&t should use the format speci*ed in the &nstructionsfor Authors "i.e., continuos vs. structured#

&t should be self-contained and able to stand alone

$mit all references to the literature and to tables or *gures

$mit abbreviations and acronyms

"bstract


12/156


"dices

As you write the abstract, !eep the title ofyour paper in front of you

When the abstract is complete, compareit with the title of your paper

"bstract


13/156


"dices +tate why you embar!ed on the proect

A gap in the literature? A debate in the literature?

A persistent social problem?

+tate what your study was about obective

+tate how you did your study methodology

+tate what you found in your study *ndings

+tate what conclusions you drawed from yourstudy argument

"bstract


14/156


"sk !oursel

What places your research in the conte%tof earlier relevant wor! done by others?

What supports the decision to perform

your study?

What are the implications of your study?

Introduction


15/156


"sk !oursel What is your argument?

(he argument is a thread that runs through yourdissertation

(he argument is a coherent series of statementsin which the author leads the reader from certain

premises to a particular conclusion

An argument has at least two parts "/# a claim and"# some evidence for that claim

A hypothesis is part of an argument

Introduction


16/156


"sk !oursel 1ow to test if you have an argument

+tatements to which you can coherently respond Iagree or I disagree

Statement& (his article reviews factors that facilitateor hinder successful coping with 1&2, includingpree%isting psychological functioning, medical health

status, 3uality and ade3uacy of social support, stressand coping style, and perceived e%pected bene*ts oftreatment.

"rgument& (his article contends that grouppsychotherapy aimed at developing a positive self-identity is valueable for those individuals coping with

the challenges posed by their 1&2-positive serostatus.

Introduction


17/156


"sk !oursel

1ow to write an argument-driven article?

4emember that publishable articles areargumentative, not representative

o not write li!e a detective collecting data

'(T

Write li!e a lawyer arguing a case

Introduction


18/156


)rating !our argument

Write the argument of the article

6ist what evidence you are bringing to bear toprove your argument

+hare your argument with three other people to

get suggestions for revision +ome should be in your *eld

+ome should be outside of it

Introduction


19/156


Reie$ing !our article or argument o & state my argument early and clearly?

1ave & organi'ed my introduction around myargument?

1ave & organi'ed the body of my article aroundmy argument?

1ave & presented evidence related to myargument?

o & restate my argument in the conclusionr?

Introduction


20/156


"dices

(he writing-up should be organi'edaround an argument that lin!s all aspectsof the research process from problemformulation, through literature review and

the presentation of research methods, tothe discussion and conclusion

Avoid opening sentences that are vacuousand evasive

Introduction

d i


21/156


"dices Avoid writing an introduction that is too

long Most medical coomunications are dicult

to read! To determine why" contributions tothree issues o the #ew $ngland %ournal oMedicine were studied and the prose

analy&ed! "New England Journal of Medicine) 7ite papers from the past couple of years

that form the immediate basis for yourstudy 'rainy et al! ()**+, and reerences therein

Introduction

d i


22/156


"dices

8egin by introducing the reader to thepertinent literature

7ontinue by stating clearly the scope and

obectives of the study

9nd by mentioning the implications ofyour results

Introduction

* h d


23/156

The scientifc manuscript"sk !oursel

What is your research design?

What is your test setting?

1ow was access achieved "if relevant#?

What is your sampling approach?

What are your independent, dependent, and control variables?

1ow you proceeded with your analysis?

*ethods

* th d


24/156


"dice

se chec!lists li!e PRIS*" ":referred4eporting &tems for +ystematic 4eviews and;eta-Analyses#, #+,S+RT "7onsolidated+tandards of 4eporting (rials#, or -"RS

"


25/156


Rules to be ollo$ed

4efer to each illustration immediately afteryou describe the results that are comprised inthat illustration

'(T

o not repeat the data within the te%t se the te%t merely to point out the trends or

highlight the signi*cance of some of the mostinteresting data

Results

R lt


26/156


Rules to be ollo$ed

&ndicate where, in the te%t, each illustrationshould be printed

+tandardi'e tables so that they appear the

same way throughout

se a table only if the comple%ity of the datawarrants it 9dward (ufte the =alileo of =raphics

Results

R lt


27/156


"dices

8uild your manuscript around the argumentand the results section which provides theevidence to support your argument

$nly provide results that pertain directly tothe title of the paper and that relate to yourargument

Results

R lt


28/156


"dices

:rovide illustrations "i.e., tables, diagrams, *gures, graphs#

:oint to particularly salient aspects of the illustrations

(itles of illustrations should describe the variables that

appear as well as the type of data presented

se )owcharts "especially in reporting of the randomi'edcontrolled trials#

Results

R lt


29/156


"dices

4eport the number of dropouts and their reasons forwithdrawal

4eport the number of participants who were lost to follow-upand describe their characteristics as at the last e%amination

escribe the controls ust as thoroughly as the participantsfrom the treated or e%posed group

4eport the si'e of the e>ects for the readers to be able to udge the clinical importance of the results

Results

R lt


30/156


"dices o not give a reference for statistics in common use

o not give a formula for statistics in common use When reporting inferential statistics, include

sucient information to allow the reader (o fully understand the conducted analyses

(o con*rm the basic reported analyses

(o enable the construction of e>ect-si'e estimates andcon*dence intervals beyond those supplied in thepaper

When using a statistical term in the narrative, usethe term, not the symbol

Results

)i i


31/156


"sk !oursel

1ow do your results illuminate yourresearch 3uestion?

Are there alternative e%planations for your

*ndings? What are the implications of your *ndings

for the argument and the research3uestions that have driven your research?

)iscussion

)iscussion


32/156


Rules to be ollo$ed

4esist the temptation to overanaly'e andoverinterpret your results

o not repeat what you have written in theintroduction section beyond a singleintroductory sentence that places your resultsin an appropriate conte%t

o not introduce new results from your study

in the discussion section

)iscussion

)iscussion


33/156


Rules to be ollo$ed &nsert a paragraph about critical assessment

shortcomings in study design, limitations inmethods, )aws in analysis, or validity ofassumptions

&nsert a paragraph on comparisons with otherstudies start comparisons with studies

consistent with your own, continue withstudies less consistent, end with studiescontradicting your *ndings

&nsert a paragraph on possible implications ofyour *ndings and suggestions for future

research

)iscussion

)iscussion


34/156


"dices

(ry to !eep it as concise as possible

iscuss each of your results in the sameorder as you presented them in the resultssection

:resent the signi*cance and the novelty ofyour results

'(T

8e careful in claims about causality

)iscussion

)iscussion


35/156


"dices 8egin by stating your wor!ing hypothesis

7ontinue by discussing whether the wor!inghypothesis has been con*rmed or not, and if not,speculate about some possible reasons for andthe implications of their refutation

9nd by considering the present and future

impact of your results and of the conclusiondrawn from them @ou could also mention the practical implications of your

research

@ou could also mention the e%periments that you plan toperform or are currently performing to e%tend your results

)iscussion

"ckno$ledgme


36/156

The scientifc manuscript (han! those who are not listed as authors but

whose e>orts contributed to the research

described in the paper and to the preparationof the paper itself (he authors than!... for...

A!nowledge those organi'ations that

contributed *nancially to your study

isclose any possible con)ict of interest in thecover letter that accompanies your paper andat the end of your a!nowledgments section

"ckno$ledgments

Reerences


37/156


(here are few aspects of the preparation ofa manuscript that are more tedious and

irritating than correcting a list of referencesthat has been compiled according to anincorrect format

"dice +tudy a list of references that has alreadybeen published in your target ournal inaddition to the &nstructions for Authors

Reerences

Reerences


38/156

The scientifc manuscript 4eferences to papers

4eferences to in press papers or unpublished data

+enden, (.


39/156

The publishing process"sk !oursel

What does your audience assume aboutyour subect?

Which aspect"s# of your subect do theyassume isEare still open to 3uestion?

Which aspect"s# of your subect do theyassume isEare not open to 3uestion?

Will you challenge any of theseassumptions in your paper?

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


40/156

The publishing process

"dices

As with any other form of communication,you have to address the needs of youraudience

Find a way to bridge the gap between what youwant to say and what editors, reviewers, andreaders want to hear

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


41/156

#ommon reasons $h! journalsreject articles

Too naro$

With proper conte%tuali'ation, nothing has alimited purpose or limited audience

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


42/156


Too broad

=ive pertinent e%amples=ive speci*c e%amples to support your

argument

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


43/156


+1 topic

Inappropriate subject matter

An unsuitable subject

utside the scope of this journal

+tudy the ournals you want to submit to

7ontact the editor

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


44/156


,ot scholarl! !lopp" # $udimentar" # %asic # &olo'uial #

bious 8e meticulous about documentation

7ite recent literature

7ite relevant literature

7ite multiple sources

4eference debates in the *eld

:rovide evidence

:rovide a critical framewor!

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


45/156


,ot su2cientl! original No new nowledge

*uplication of alread" published articles

+ailing to announce originalit"

4ead in your *eld

Articulate originality

7laim your idea

evelop your voice

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


46/156


Poor structure ,oor writing # ,oor presentation # ,oor

organi-ation +urface your structure by using summary

paragraphs, transition sentences, andsubheadings

+tic! to your point by organi'ing your article

around a single signi*cant idea - argumentelete the redundant or irrelevant

+ubordinate the concrete by relating theparticular usually evidence to the general usually the theory or argument

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


47/156


,ot signifcant

Insigni.cant # /nimportant # f little merit #Not applicable

Articulate signi*cance

+elect the right ournal

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


48/156


Theoreticall! or methodologicall!3a$ed

,oor conceptual design # Argument notsupported b" data # Insu0cient data #Inaccuratel" calculated statistics #Methodological problems # Inade'uate theor" etail your methodology

7ite opposing views

Avoid imbalance because theory comes alivethrough concrete particulars ust as the concretebecomes signi*cant through e%planatory theory

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


49/156


Too man! misspellings and gramatical

errors

!lopp" # badl" written # hastil" written #nonnatie # poorl" presented

4un a spelling chec!

4un a grammar chec!

1ire an editor

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


50/156

The importance o picking therigh journal

(he most important thing you can do to

improve your chances of publication +tating your argument early and clearly

(he second most important thing you can do

to improve your chances of publication :ic!ing the right ournal

:ic!ing the wrong ournal can signi*cantlydelay publication

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


51/156

inding suitable academic journals

Searching or journals

As! your advisor and colleagues

7hec! your citations and their bibliographies

+earch electronic databases

Targeting a -ournal

Targeting a


52/156

*atching !our article tosuitable journals

oes the ournal have an upcoming theme or

special issue on your topic?


53/156

*atching !our article tosuitable journals

oes the style of your article match the ournalsstyle?

Formal vs. &nformal 7onservative vs. :rogressive

:layful vs. +erious

o you !now any of the ournals editors?

8efore ma!ing a *nal decision, send a 3uerryletter and if the response is positive, read recentissues

g g -ournal

Submission


54/156

inali4ing !our article

The perils o perection

(here are diminishing returns toperfecting your wor!

6earn to send your imperfect wor! outinto the world

Submission

Submission


55/156

Sending !our article

Writing the coer letter

se letterhead

Dame the editor

:rovide the title

&nclude the abstract Articulate the contribution

escribe the appeal to the readers

Sub ss o

Submission


56/156



;ention the ournal

$>er warrants Authorship

$wnership :ublication

+ubmission

Submission


57/156



=ive the word count

;ention any permissions

;ention any funding

&nclude your full contact information

Submission


58/156



;iscellaneous :rotection of human subects

7on)icts of interests

4eviewers

Submission


59/156


Putting !our article in the journal5sst!le

Preparing the fnal print or

electronic ersion

Submission


60/156

Sending !our

article

+ubmission on paper

+ubmission on 7

9lectronic submission

Response


61/156

The publishing process Acceptance without revision #elebrate &)

Acceptance with "minorEmaor# revisions #elebrate moderatel!6 &7

4eection with an o>er to reconsider

$utright reection

p

Response


62/156

#ongratulations8

!our paper has beenaccepted6

p

Ethical reporting oresearch results


63/156

Ethical and /egal

Standards in Publishing 9nsure replication

9nsure veri*cation

o not fabricate data

o not falsify data

o not modify results

o not omitt observations

research results

)ata retention andsharing


64/156

Ethical and /egal

Standards in Publishing

4etain raw data for a minimum of *ve years

after publication

4etain instructions, treatment manuals,procedure details, software for a minimumof *ve years after publication

:rovide upon re3uest

sharing

)uplicate andpiecemeal publication


65/156

Ethical and /egal

Standards in Publishing )uplicate publication G the publication of the

same data or the same idea in two separatesources

The case& brief reports

*a!be the case& manuscripts previously published inabstracted form in the proceedings of an annual meeting

or in a periodical with limited circulation or availability

,ot the case& the material that has been o>ered forpublic sale such as conference proceedings or boo!chaptersH the reanalysis of published data in light of newtheories or methodologies

p po data

)uplicate andpiecemeal publication


66/156

Ethical and /egal

Standards in PublishingPiecemeal publication G the unnecessary splitting of

the *ndings from one research endeavour into multiplesources

Inorm the editor& whether the publication of two or morereports based on the same or closely related researchconstitutes fragmented publication is a matter of editorial

udgment

,ot the case& multidisciplinary proects, longitudinal studies,large scale studies as long as the di>erent papers ma!euni3ue scienti*c contributions

7onse3uences the manuscript can be reected withoutfurther consideration or retracted once published

p po data

Plagiarism


67/156

Ethical and /egal


9ach time you paraphrase another authorby summari'ing a passage or rearrangingthe order of a sentence and change some ofthe words, you need to credit the source inthe te%t G this applies to written words but

also to ideas

Sel9


68/156

Ethical and /egal


When duplication of ones words or ideas is

e%tensive, you need to cite yourself

All of the authors own words or ideas that are citedshould be located in a single paragraph or at mosta few paragraphs, with a citation at the end of each

$pen such paragraphs with a phrase li!e IAs & havepreviously discussedJ

plagiarism

#on3ict o


69/156

Ethical and /egal


isclose the potential positive or negative

distorting in)uences

The case& being the copyright holder of andEorrecipient of royalties from a psychological testHparticipation on a board of directors or any other

relationship with an entity or person that is in someway part of the paper

,ot the case& holdings in a company through amutual fund

interests

"uthorship


70/156

Intellectual propert! rights"uthorship G Authorship is reserved for personswho ma!e a substantial contribution to and whoaccept responsability for a published wor!

Substantial contribution G formulating theproblem or hypothesisH structuring thee%perimental designH conducting the statisticalanalysisH interpreting the resultsH writing a maorportion of the paper

*inor contribution G designing and building theapparatusH advising about the statistical analysisHcollecting the dataH entering the dataH recruitingparticipantsH conducting routine observations ordiagnoses

"uthorship


71/156

Intellectual propert! rights+rder o authorship (he name of the principle contributor should

appear *rst, with subse3uent names in orderof decreasing contribution

&f authors played e3ual roles in the researchand publication, they can note this in theauhtor note

4elative status should not determine theorder of authorship

octoral students should be listed asprincipal author, if the paper is substantiallybased on their dissertation

Writing


72/156

What makes good

$riting

=ood writing communicates an idea

clearly and e>ectively

=ood writing communicates an ideaelegantly and stylish

'asics

Writing


73/156

What makes a good

$riter

1aving something to say

1aving a logical and clear thin!ing

nowing a few simple, learnable rules of

style

'asics

Writing


74/156

Steps to becoming a good$riter

Write to engage your readers

4ead and imitate

4evise. Dobody gets it perfect on the*rst try.

7ut ruthlessly. Dever become tooattached to your words.

(a!e ris!s. Find your voice as a writer.

'asics

Writing


75/156

Inorm and persuade the

reader %no$ !our reader and $rite or !our reader

9liminate unnecessary redundancy

Avoid digressions

Avoid overstatements

ont generali'e unnecessarily

+impler words are preferred over comple% words

+impler sentences are preferred over comple%sentences

se armative rather than negative constructions se transitions

7ite sources

Prooread !our paper careull!

'asics

Writing


76/156

"im or econom!

because instead of based on the fact that

for or to instead of for the purpose of

there were seeral subjects who completedK

it is suggested that a relationship ma" e1ist K

both alie

one and the same

a total of n subects

four di>erent groups

absolutely essential

'asics

Writing


77/156

"im or econom!

found previously

small in si'e

in close pro%imity

very close to 'ero

much better

period of time

summari'e brie)y

the reason is because

also included

e%cept for

'asics

Writing


78/156

"im or precision

patient or g"mnast instead of subject

concentration or fre'uenc" instead of leel

'asics

Writing


79/156

:rammar usage ; Parallel #onstruction

'etween and nd

#orrect& We recorded the di>erence bet$een theperformance of subects who completed the *rst tas!and the perormance of those who completed thesecond tas!.

Incorrect& We recorded the di>erence bet$een theperformance of subects who completed the *rst tas!and the second task .

'asics

Writingi


80/156


'oth and nd #orrect& (he names were dicult both to pronounce

and to spell.

Incorrect& (he names were both dicult to pronounceand spell.

Dever use both with as well as. (he resultingconstruction is redundant. #orrect& (he names were dicult to pronounce as $ell

as to spell.

Incorrect& (he names were dicult both to pronounceas $ell as to spell.

'asics

Writingi


81/156


#either and #or # $ither and Or

#orrect& ,either the responses to the auditory stimulinor the responses to the tactile stimuli wererepeated.

Incorrect& ,either the responses to the auditorystimuli nor the tactile stimuli were repeated.

#orrect& (he respondents either gave the worst answer

or gae the best ans$er. #orrect& (he respondents gave either the worst answer

or the best ans$er.

Incorrect& (he respondents either gave the worstanswer or the best ans$er.

'asics

Writing' i


82/156


#ot only and 'ut also

#orrect& It is surprising not onl! that pencil-and-paper scores predicted this result but also that all otherpredictors were less accurate.

Incorrect& It is not onl! surprising that pencil-and-paper scores predicted this result but also that all otherpredictors were less accurate.

'asics

Writing' i


83/156


9lements in a series should also be parallel in form

#orrect& (he participants $ere told to make themselves comfortable, to read the instructions, and toask about anything they did not understand.

Incorrect& (he participants $ere told to make themselves comfortable, to read the instructions, andthat the! should ask about anything they did notunderstand.

'asics

Writing' i


84/156

Spelling ; Preerred

Spelling

Singular

Appendi%

7riterion

atum

:henomenon Freuds

Plural

Appendices

7riteria

ata

:henomena (he Freuds

'asics

'reit!


85/156

#ommon clutteread weight words and phrases As it is well !nown

As it has been shown &t can be regarded that

&t should be emphasi'ed that

9mpty words and phrases

8asic tenets of nnecessary argon and acronyms

4epetitive words or phrases

'reit!


86/156

#ommon clutter

Word! ersion

A maority of

A number of

Are of the sameopinion

6ess fre3uently

occurring All three of the

=ive rise to

ue to the fact that

1ave an e>ect on

#risp ersion

;ost ;any

Agree

4are

(he three 7ause

8ecause

A>ect

'reit!


87/156

E


88/156

E


89/156

Eects of :=Falpha on dogs, wascarried out by intravenously introducingthe drug. &n the e%periments, arelatively small 3uantity, L0 mg, wasadministered to each animal. &n each

case, :=Falpha proved fatalH all /0dogs e%piring before a lapse of *veminutes after the inection.

/ogic =#larit!


90/156

E


91/156

Take home messagesStart earl!1ow to present and ustify the research 3uestions that are driving

your research?

1ow to structure the theoretical and research literature that willhave been used to frame your research 3uestions?

'e persuasie:ersuade your readers that your *ndings and conclusions are

signi*cant and that they are plausible

:et eedback =et as much feedbac! as possible

4espond positively to the points made

Structure !our $riting


92/156

:rantWritingA step-by-step guide

T!pes o:rants


93/156

:roect grants :rimarily support research proects

+econdarily support salaries usually cover 0M to 5M of the principal

investigators salary

7areer development grants :rimarily support salaries

usually cover C5M to /00M of the principalinvestigators salary

:rants

undingSources


94/156

Agency for 1ealthcare 4esearch and Nuality

"www.ahr3.gov#

7ommunity of +cience

"www.fundingopps.cos.com#

=rantsnet

"www.grantsnet.org#

(he Foundation 7enter

"www.fdncenter.org#

(he Dational &nstitutes of 1ealth

"www.grants.nih.gov#

Sources

To Remember


95/156

" strong proposal is in

a lotter!

ho$eer

" $eak proposal iscertainl! dead

Read the call


96/156

What is the scope of the re3uested proects?

What is the time frame of the grant process?

What is the length of the grant?

Are there any special needs or uni3ueaspects of the grant?

oes the grant re3uire cash or in-!ind

match?

Step >& read the grant

inormation and conditions

Read the call


97/156

Are the proects granted and end-pointsre3uested within your ability or capability toprovide?

Are these proects within the mission of your

organi'ation?

Step ?& decide i the grant is a good

match or !our organi4ation

Read the call


98/156

o you have the e%pertise to run thisproect, or can you hire the e%pertise?

&s this a substantial deviation from yourroutine or normal proects?

Step ?& decide i the grant is a good

match or !our organi4ation

Step @& stud! the grantRead the call


99/156

(a!e notes and ma!e an outline of thethings they are as!ing for

6oo! for !eywords "so called bu'' words# inthe document eywords usually are repeated fre3uently in the

document and indicate a philosophy or strategy,

which the funder wants to be followed

Step @& stud! the grantconditions

Read the call


100/156

Who is your audience?

Who will read the proposal and evaluate it?

What have they funded before?

Are there other programs in the countrywhich provide similar services?

Step A& do !our home$ork

Read the call


101/156

While you donOt want to PcopyP their programs,you donOt want to have to re-create the wheelfrom scratch either

@ou also want to learn from other programsOmista!es if possible

o they have a philosophical orientation anddoes it agree with yours?

What literatureEresearch is available on the

topic?

Step A& do !our home$ork

Step B& conceptuali4e the#onceptuali4e


102/156

(his is a critical step. &t is EL of the process.

8efore you try to write anything, spendsome time thin!ing about how you would dothe program.

=et Pthe big pictureP clear in your mind. @oumay want to start by building a logic modelor drawing a )ow chart.

Step B& conceptuali4e theprogram

Step B& conceptuali4e the#onceptuali4e


103/156

&t is important to !nowWhat program components will be needed.

1ow these program components will beimplemented.

1ow each program component relates toother program elements.

1ow each program component relates tothe goals of the proect.

1ow each program component relates tothe re3uirements of the funder.

1ow the program components relate toyour e%isting activities.

Step B& conceptuali4e theprogram


104/156

D>st7 )rat


105/156

;a!e it easy for the reader to identify what theyare reading. 7learly label each section.

6ead the reader by the hand. (ell them whatthey are reading and why.

4elate each section to the others "your )ow

chart and outline will help here#.

4elate each program element to a goal of thegrantor.

Step C& drat the grant

proposal

D>st7 )rat


106/156

4elate each program element to the othersand the Pbig pictureP.

7learly spell out facets important to thereview process.

se the bu'' words where appropriate"donOt parrot#.

Step C& drat the grant

proposal


107/156

Rest


108/156

After writing the *rst draft, set it aside anddo something else for a day or two.

@ou want to get some separation from the*rst draft.

Step & set the proposal aside

or a da! or t$o

Reie$


109/156

After Q-QR hours, read your proposal.

&magine you are a reviewer.

6oo! at your proposal as if you !new nothingabout it.

+core your own proposal using the evaluationcriteria you outlined from the grant programguidelines or ac3uired through yourcommunication with the program ocer.

Step F& read !our proposal as a

reie$er

Reie$


110/156

;ar! areas in the proposal which confuse you orare not clear enough

onOt try to edit them at this time, ust mar!them and read on.

(a!e notes about what you found unclear, wea!,

or missing in the proposal.

7ompare your draft against any chec!listprovided by the grantor.


reie$er

Reie$


111/156

7hech whether your proposal is clear andcomplete.

4eview your draft with a critical eye.

Anticipate the strongest obections and

counter them.

emonstrate that your re3uest is serious bydescribing the speci*c program activities.


reie$er

Reie$


112/156

7learly state the purpose and *nancialre3uest of the proposal in your cover letter.

8e con*dent in your approach.

onOt be apologetic.


reie$er

D?nd7 )rat


113/156

Dow is the time to edit.

7orrect areas you found wea! or unclear.

+trengthen the lin!ages between the

sections of the proposal.

@our goal "as it was in the *rst draft# is toma!e it easy for the reviewer.

Step G& using the notes rom !our

reie$8 $rite the second drat

D?nd7 )rat


114/156

(hin! visually when you write.

8e descriptive.

8e brief.



D?nd7 )rat


115/156

se transitional e%pressions - words andphrases to connect your paragraphs, asthese connectors can help you achieve

coherence in your writing.

(ell a story that has a clever beginning, anabsorbing middle and an unforgettable

ending.

se plain language.



eedback


116/156

Always have an outside party review andcriti3ue your proposal.

@ou are too close to the draft now to beobective.

=ive colleagues a copy of the grant

re3uirements, evaluation criteria, and your draft- as! them to mar! up your draft, ma!ing noteswhere you confuse them or where they donOtunderstand the connection between a part ofthe proect and the overall proect.

Step >& gie the second drat

to other people to read

eedback


117/156

&t is important you select someone who isliterate and who will be 84(A6

@ou want honest feedbac!

Step >& gie the second drat

to other people to read

inali4e


118/156

7onsider your peers input

For each point you must decide if their criticism

is valid

&n the end, you must be comfortable with theproposal

o pay attention to the your colleagueOscomments however. &f you confused them youwill probably confuse the reviewer.

Step >>& using !our colleagues

input8 $rite the fnal proposal

Triple #heck


119/156

8efore delivering or mailing the *nalproposal, use the chec!list you preparedwhen you studied the proposal.

9nsure each re3uired item is attached,including all mandatory appendices andsupporting documents.

;a!e sure you did not violate anyinstructions regarding proposal length,typeface, style, page numbering, etc.

Step >?& compare !our proposal $ith

!our checklist o reJuired items

Triple #heck


120/156

&f the funder re3uired special labels orpac!aging of the proposal, follow theme%actly.

:roofread the entire grant two or threetimes for completeness, accuracy andtypographical errors.

:roofread your proposals in multiplereadings, loo!ing for di>erent features oneach reading.



Triple #heck


121/156

7ontent oes your proposal have enough substance?

Are your ideas complete?

Form &s your organi'ation logical?

Are all facts and *gures accurate?

Are ideas e%pressed clearly?

&s the proposal design visually appealing?

Are all the maor pieces of the proposal in theproper order?

oes your draft loo! attractive and readable?



Triple #heck


122/156

;echanics

Are words spelled correctly, especially proper

names?

Are all numbers and computations accurate?

Are sentences grammatically correct, includingsubect-verb agreement?

Are sentences punctuated properly?




123/156

Tip >& understand the

perspectie o the reie$ers4eviewers are

intelligent

4eviewers are savvy

about research4eviewers have a broad

fund of scienti*c!nowledge

'(T

4eviewers have little in-depth e%perience inyour area of interest

Focus

7onciseness

7onceptual clarity

(ransparent languageAvoid argon

Avoid topic-speci*cabbreviations

Avoid topic-speci*c

terminology8uild a self-contained

proposal


124/156

(heir guidance can be invaluable in the

grant writing process

Tip ?& seek guidance rom the program

o2cer or grants administrator


125/156

For Dational &nstitutes of 1ealth fundingmechanisms, information on funded grants

can be obtained from the 7omputer 4etrievalof &nformation on +cienti*c :roects database"www.crisp.cit.nih.gov#

Tip @& reie$ successul grant

applications


126/156

Find out in advance as much as possibleabout the potential reviewers

&dentify possible reviewers from the scienti*cliterature

&dentify possible reviewers from the websitesof foundations

Tip A& kno$ !our audience


127/156

(he importance of the proposed studyshould be

communicated clearly

readily apparent to someone outside the *eld

:resent the burden of the problem in3uantitative terms

Tip B& stress the signifcance


128/156

emonstrate the impact of the proposedresearch on the *eld

o you add to the e%isting body of !nowledge?

o you advance understanding?

o you alleviate human disease and su>ering?



129/156

emonstrate the impact of the proposedresearch on the *eld Why is this research important?

Why is this research innovative?

What are the implications of this research in

terms of incremental !nowledge?

What are the implications of this research interms of paradigm shift?



130/156

$btain and follow all the guidelines e%actly

&nstitutional 4eview 8oard approvalre3uirements

Formatting re3uirements

Tip C& ollo$ all the rules


131/156

+ee! advice early on for input about

+tudy design

+ample si'e

ata analysis

Tip & get adice and input

rom a biostatistician

i ll h i


132/156

+et yourself an internal deadline forcompleting the application Q to S wee!s

before the actual deadline to allow for reviewby mentors and colleagues

Tip F& allo$ enough time or

reie$ and reision

Tip G& $rite the abstract


133/156

(he abstract should distill the essentialelements of the research proect into short,concise, and clear statements

(he abstract is the *rst portion of the grantthat reviewers read

(he abstract must engage the interest of

reviewers immediately

(he abstract must sustain the interest ofreviewers throughout

careull!

Tip G& $rite the abstract


134/156

(he abstract will guide the assignment of a grant toa particular study

(he abstract should highlight the nature of the problem

(he abstract should highlight the need for the research

(he abstract should highlight the hypothesis to betested

(he abstract should highlight the methods to be used

(he abstract should highlight the signi*cance anduni3ue features of the research

careull!

What gets a proposalrejected

+bjecties = H!potheses


135/156

#ommon critiJues

nderdeveloped

:oorly focused

$verly ambitious

rejected


+bjecties = H!potheses


136/156

Kaluable suggestions 8egin the section with a concise, accurate

synopsis of the research +tudy design

+ample si'e +tudy groups

:rimary outcomes

7ontinue with primary and secondary aims andrelated hypotheses Focused

Feasible

7learly conceptuali'ed

rejected


'ackground = Signifcance


137/156

#ommon critiJues

(he section did not ustify the need for the study

(he section provided too much e%traneousbac!ground information

(he section overstated the signi*cance of the

study

(he section is too long

rejected




138/156

Kaluable suggestions For each bac!ground subsection it is important

to show e%actly how the provided informationdirectly lin!s with the proposed proect

(his sections should naturally progress from thedescription of the current state of !nowledge tothe gap that the proposed research will *ll

Add a signi*cance paragraph at the end of thesection

+pecify in strong but realistic terms how theproposed proect will contribute to the *eld

rejected




139/156

(hus, these studies demonstrate the importance ofthis areaK

(hese studies provide the important bac!ground forthis study inK

(he proposed proect will build on this previous wor!K

(he proposed proect will address limitations in theprevious wor! byK

rejected


Pilot Work


140/156

#ommon critiJues

:reliminary or pilot wor! was lac!ing

:reliminary or pilot wor! was inade3uatelydescribed

:reliminary or pilot wor! lac!ed clear lin!age tothe proposed study

rejected


Pilot Work


141/156

Kaluable suggestions

+ummari'e the principal investigators "or co-investigators# previous wor! related to the

proposed proect

7onvince the reviewers that (he principal investigator has the e%pertise and

e%perience to carry out the wor! (he wor! is feasible

+uitable groundwor! has been done

+tudy participants are available

rejected


:eneral Issues


142/156

#ommon critiJues

6ayout and formatting

&nformation presented in the wrong sections

(ypographical errors

+mall font si'es

rejected


:eneral Issues


143/156


=ive time and attention to proofreading

:rovide spaces between paragraphs and betweensections

;a!e the grant easy to read

Address study limitations thoroughly andrealistically

rejected


*ethods


144/156

#ommon critiJues nderdeveloped methods

Kaluable suggestions 6ength evote at least 50M of the page allowance

to methodsesign and setting What is the randomi'ation

procedure? 1ow will you blind participant allocationto treatment groups? 1ow will you select controls?Will you enroll a representative sample? &f not, will

there be any potential biases? 1ow will you handlethem? o the settings compare and e%trapolate toother settings?

rejected


*ethods Dsample7


145/156

#ommon critiJues (he study sample is potentially biased or

nonrepresentative

(he inclusion criteria are poorly described or not

well-usti*ed (he e%clusion criteria are poorly described or not

well-usti*ed

(he e%clusions would result in important bias inthe sample

&mportant e%clusions were overloo!ed

rejected


*ethods Dparticipants7


146/156

#ommon critiJues (he availability of participants for the proposed

study is not assured


:rovide data and assurance that ade3uatenumbers of patients will be available for thestudy in the proposed setting, given the inclusionand e%clusion criteria

:rovide data from pilot study :rovide data from previous related studies

rejected


*ethods Dprocedures7


147/156

#ommon critiJues

&nade3uate description of the proposed studyinstruments or variables

7oncerns about validity and reliability of the datacollection methods

rejected




148/156


escribe all study procedures and instruments indetail

A tabular format can help provide information onstandardi'ed and validated instruments,including references and performance

characteristics such as sensitivity, speci*city,and reliability statistics

rejected




149/156

Kaluable suggestions 6ist and de*ne all variables in tabular format

$utline the screening and enrollment procedures

$utline subse3uent assessment and follow-upprocedures

9lucidate the interviewer training andstandardi'ation or reliability assessments

rejected


*ethods Doutcomes7


150/156

#ommon critiJues

7oncerns about the lac! of or inade3uateblinding of outcome assessment

&nade3uate description or speci*cation of theoutcome measure

7oncerns about validity or reliability of theoutcome

rejected


*ethods Doutcomes7


151/156

Kaluable suggestions Fully de*ne the outcome and describe the

performance characteristics of the measuresused for each outcome

&deally, the outcomes should be assessed bytrained research sta> who are not involved in theintervention and who are blinded to the studyhypotheses and to the intervention status of theparticipants

(he study should be ade3uately powered toevaluate all of the primary outcomes in the study

rejected


*ethods Dinterention7


152/156

#ommon critiJues

=rant proposals poorly describe the intervention

=rant proposals present an unstandardi'edintervention

=rant proposals present an intervention of3uestionable potency

=rant proposals do not address contamination or co-intervention in the control group

rejected


*ethods Dinterention7


153/156

Kaluable suggestions $>er enough detail so that to ensure the

intervention can be replicated

escribe the interventionists, their pro*ciency, andany training re3uired

=ive details on how you will trac! adherence tointerventions

4eport how you will monitor potential sources ofcontamination or co-intervention in the control groupduring the study

rejected


*ethods Ddata anal!sis7


154/156

#ommon critiJues

&nsucient description of the analytic approach

&nade3uate control for potential confounders

&nsucient description of the handling of missingdata

Dot enough consideration of attrition

rejected




155/156

Kaluable suggestions 9arly and ongoing involvement of a biostatistician

Fully describe data management and 3uality

assurance procedures such as double dataentry, error and validity chec!s, and training ofsta> who will handle data managementprocedures

6ay out proposed analyses here for each speci*caim or hypothesis

rejected




156/156

Kaluable suggestions se caution in specifying only one statistical

approach, since loc!ing oneself into a particularstatistical method may raise concerns

iscuss alternate strategies considered and why youdecided on your approach

7arefully address how nonresponses and missingdata will be handled in analyses

:rovide relevant sample si'e and power calculations

for primary outcomes applying best estimates fore>ect si'es from pilot wor! or previous studies

rejected

slideuri mcs 2014.pptx

Documents