2 Comments
Looking for a one-page reference on NIH’s application changes to address scientific rigor and transparency? Check out this handy infographic developed by NIH’s Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
You’ll find this resource and much more on the NIH rigor and reproducibility web page on grants.nih.gov.
Is the NIH confusing research publications with an application for funding? In grant applications one only provides preliminary evidence of the feasibility of an idea and is ranked on both, the idea and its feasibility. Rigor, reproducibility and transparency are essential for peer-reviewed scientific publications.
No specifics are given for “how your experimental design and methods
will achieve robust and unbiased results”. I can think of a few ways of how this can be done but without specifics my thoughts may not be recognized as “correct” by fellow reviewers. I think NIH needs to start being specific on this as stating such conditions will not make applications to have more “robust” science. Well, authors could start claiming that their methodology is very robust – but how do we know?