Grant Writing Workshop Specific AimsSpecific Aims

Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, ScM

The NHLBIThe NHLBI’’s Framingham Heart Studys Framingham Heart Study

Boston University School of MedicineBoston University School of Medicine

♥ No industry relationships to discloseNo industry relationships to disclose♥ Associate Editor, Circulation

♥ 2R01HL092577♥ 1R01HL102214

♥ N01-HC 25195♥ 1P50 HL12016

Resources

• FDD Page Isabel Dominguez created on grant writing tips http://www.bumc.bu.edu/facdev-medicine/for-researchers/grant-writing/

• Russell & Morrison’s Grant Writers’ Seminars & Workshops The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook

BUMC Grant Writing Resources

• Associate Provost for Research• Carter Cornwall’s Proposal Training• Clinical Research Resources Office• Clinical and Translational Science Institute• Corporate and Foundation Relations• Expertise and Instrumentation Search• Office of Medical Education • Office of Sponsored Programs• Vice Chair for Research (DOM)

How do Reviewers Work?

• Hard

• For virtually all grant reviewers, the study section work takes place after their day job

• Your job is to make their job easy

Getting StartedHow do you Pick a Topic?

• What excites you and experts in your field?

Is it important? Significance

Is it novel? Innovation

• Will it build an identity distinct from your mentor?

• Read the everything you can find on the topic

• NIH Reporter what is already funded on your topic http://projectreporter.nih.gov/reporter.cfm

• Will it build to subsequent funding/RO1s?

Getting Started?The Blank Page

• Ask to see colleagues’ successful grants

• Ask to see colleagues’ critiques

•Have you blocked out time to write your grant???

How important are the Specific Aims?

How important are the Specific Aims?

Fundamental to the Application’s Success

Why are the Specific Aims Important?

1. Reviewers often determine a grant’s merit merely after reading the S.A.

2. Study section silent reading period. S.A. is only section most study section members will read

3. Roadmap to the entire grant

Specific AimsChapter 7 - Grant Application Writer’s Workbook

Outline Grant – Paragraph 1

1. Significance

Clinical

Current knowledge

Gap in knowledge/unmet need

Specific AimsOutline Grant – Paragraph 2

2. Long term goal

Big picture of research program

Objective of application

Central hypothesis and rationale

Links back to first paragraph

Specific AimsOutline Grant – Paragraph 3

3. Specific Aims – for each aim

Approach

» Specific question

» Sample

» Design

» Specific hypothesis tested

Specific AimsOutline Grant – Paragraph 4

4. ‘Payoff’

Expected outcomes

Why group & environment perfectly suited

What impact on patients and field

What dew Raveiwrs KNOT want to sea?

•Details details details• A sloppy grant

NO typos / grammar problems Correct references Clear subject headingsLogical flow• Leads to concerns about ability to conduct careful research, publish high impact papers • A well-laid out grant makes it easier for the Reviewer to see the science• Slick presentation cannoT RESCUE HO HUM contentA sloppy grant

NO typos / grammar problems Correct referencesClear subject headings Logical flowLeads to concerns about ability to conduct careful research, publish high impact papers

• A well-laid out grant makes it easier for • the Reviewer to see the scienceSlick presentation cannot rescue ho hum content A sloppy grant NO typos / grammar problems Correct references

Clear subject headingsLogical flow Leads to concerns about ability to conduct careful research, publish high impact papers A well-laid out manuscript makes it easier for the Reviewer to see the science Slick presentation cannot rescue ho hum contentA sloppy grant

NO typos / grammar problems Correct references Clear subject headings Logical flow

• Leads to concerns about ability to conduct careful research, publish high impact papers A well-laid out grant makes it easier for the Reviewer to see the scienceSlick presentation cannot rescue ho hum content

What do Reviewers NOT want to see?• Slick presentation cannot rescue ho hum content

• A sloppy grant Instead aim No typos No grammar problems Avoid long paragraphs Correct references Subject headings Avoid tiny font Logical flow Avoid TNTC abbreviations

• Sloppiness encourages concerns about ability to conduct careful research, publish high impact papers

• Lucid writing, organized, well-laid out grant makes it easier for the Reviewer to see the science

• Can scientist not in the field understand the grant?

What Are Common Pitfalls?Significance

• Not of major public health import

• Technical tour de force, but so what

• Lack of a conceptual model

• Lack of stated hypothesis seeking to test

‘fishing expedition’

• Lack of generalizability

What Are Common Pitfalls?Innovation

• Incremental

When should an early career investigator start working on a grant?

1. You cannot start too early

2. 2 submission rule: 1st submission must be strong Grants not discussed higher chance of ‘double jeopardy’

3. S.A. formulated at least 6 months in advance

4. First draft 12 weeks in advance

5. Mentors and colleagues have time to review draft at least 1-2 months in advance

6.6.You cannot start too earlyYou cannot start too early

When should ALLinvestigators start working on a grant?