Conceptualizing a Successful NIH Grant Application Specific Aims

Conceptualizing a Successful NIH Grant Application: Specific Aims, Significance, and Innovation

Finding the Right Funding Mechanism and NIH IC § Review the Strategic Priorities of different NIH ICs § Sell your concept papers/specific aims to different ICs § Engage project officer early on § Funding mechanism must fit your study aims and proposed scope of work § Appropriate for your career stage

Specific Aims Section (1 page) § § Most critical section of the grant Take your time Most reviewers will likely read your specific aims This is your “abstract. ” § Should include: § Hypotheses § Conceptual framework/model § Significance and innovation (e. g. , methods) § Summary of preliminary studies (if applicable) § Study design § Outcomes for each aim

Specific Aims Section § Use about half of the page to explain the rationale § Circulate to co-investigators, mentor, your future project officer, and external reviewers § Specific aims should map on to the rest of the application § Conceptual framework § Measures § Analytic plan

Specific Aims Section § Use latter part of your specific aims to actually list your aims. § Be specific § State your plans using strong verbs like identify, define, quantify, evaluate, establish, determine. § Describe each aim in one to three sentences. § List hypotheses (if applicable)

Significance criterion § Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? § Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? § If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? § How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Innovation criterion § Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? § Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? § Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Significance and Innovation Sections § Large emphasis on both of these sections in review § Make sure that your proposed study fills a gap in the research and that it has a significant “impact” on the field § Check the NIH reporter § These sections should be succinct but comprehensive § Significance (1 ½ - 2 ½ pages) § Innovation ( ½ page) § Bold, underline, and number sections consistently

Significance and Innovation Sections § If the significance and innovation are not rated well, your application will likely not be rated well § Significance and Innovation are the hardest to address in a resubmission § Speak to your program officer

Conceptual Model/Theoretical Framework § MUST have one (for most grants)! § Make sure that it is referenced in the significance section (and in the innovation section, if appropriate) § Should link to measures and analysis plan

Overly Ambitious Grant: A Fatal Flaw (especially for new investigators) § Limit the number of aims and hypotheses (in your specific aims) § Proposed project must appear feasible and doable § Do not want to appear as if you are conducting two studies in one § Makes you appear an inexperienced investigator

Give yourself Plenty of Time • Sufficient time to circulate draft prior to deadline. • Circulate to investigators, mentors, and external reviewers • Procrastination can lead to typos, inconsistencies, lack of organization, and lack of crossreferencing