With research budgets tight and review procedures being streamlined, applicants for research funds, especially newer investigators, may become disheartened. This article provides advice that we believe improves the quality of a written application. We detail ideas for how to develop applications that are complete and most easily understood by reviewers. Important elements include: a focus on selected, specific critical hypotheses that have both clinical and theoretical significance, documenting feasibility, establishing reliable effect sizes, providing specific analyses for each hypothesis, and writing a clear, well-articulated, "reader-friendly" application. In addition, we emphasize the value of collegial review and critique of the application prior to submission. We believe this "curbstone" advice will facilitate a well-reasoned review and if funds are available, eventual funding.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!