Find examples of successfully funded projects in your field. Search by topic keyword or Principal Investigator name. Ask Us! Toolkits Services About Us. Biomedical Sciences Toolkit.
Log in to Wiley Online Library
See the types of research funded by a particular funding body foundation, agency, association. Guide to effective grant writing: How to write a successful NIH grant application. Boston, Springer, Schimel, Joshua.
Writing Science: How to write papers that get cited and proposals that get funded. How will reviewers respond to a new application that closely resembles one they recently rejected? How can you convince a recalcitrant NIH to fund a great idea that they've already rejected several times?
How do you decide when it's time to give up on an idea you've been pursuing for years, even when to you it seems more compelling than ever and you're running out of time? Here's one way of thinking about it, based on interviews with several NIH-funded PIs: Despite the new policy, it probably doesn't make sense to change your behavior very much. If, after a second resubmission, your study section clearly isn't buying it, it's probably time to take that idea elsewhere and start over with a new idea at NIH.
Only if the second submission is really close to getting funded and there's an obvious way to address the reviewer's criticisms, does it make sense to persist, and even then there are no guarantees. Today, with paylines—the percentile below which applications cannot be funded—at historic lows, Suzanne Pfeffer , professor of biochemistry at Stanford University in California, and former president of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, expects the new resubmission policy to make a big difference for scientists at all career stages.
Last year, one of her applications fell just short of the payline.
Although not yet funded, the project is already moving forward in interesting and important ways, she says. So she plans to resubmit it with additional, preliminary data. While the current mechanism can separate a good proposal from a bad one, it cannot distinguish between two equally good applications, veteran PIs like Pfeffer and Berg say. Berg notes that the new policy will not solve the underlying problem: that there are more skilled applicants than the system can support at current budget levels. Skeptics often speak of "shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic ," when a modest measure is proposed to mitigate a severe, fundamental hardship.
ACEP // American College of Emergency Physicians
Critics posting comments on Rockey's blog, Rock Talk , put this change in that category. Still, for investigators who have come close but haven't yet succeeded, the measure offers a ray of hope. All rights Reserved. Chandrakala Puligilla. Jeremy Berg.
Suzanne Pfeffer. Follow Science Careers. Search Jobs Enter keywords, locations or job types to start searching for your new science career. Search Search. Hu Aug.