NIH (including help desks) will be closed on Monday, January 18, 2021, for the federal holiday (Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr.). If a grant application due date falls on a federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Many NOSIs designate parent announcements for application submission and most of our parent announcements were recently reissued with updated language and application forms (FORMS-F). So, checking the status of the designated FOA prior to submission is now more important than ever.
Have you ever been tempted to embellish your credentials in a grant application? What about fabricating credentials? Would this be a case of research misconduct or a violation of review integrity? These can be costly errors, as shown by the case described below (inspired by a true story; we’ve changed details and fictionalized names).
Due to the potential exceptional impact of the declared public health emergency, we want to assure our recipient community that NIH will be doing our part to help you continue your research. Our website on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Information for NIH Applicants and Recipients has a list of available resources.
NIH is currently accepting public comments on the use of standards for capturing, integrating, and exchanging clinical data for research purposes (NOT-OD-19-150). This is a great opportunity to hear more from the community on ways to strengthen approaches that find, share, and access high-quality patient data, while also making it more interoperable and reusable. Such goals align with long-standing NIH data sharing policies and what was also called for in a related NIH strategic plan on data science.
At NIH, we are heavily invested in our workforce and in understanding the barriers they face. What characteristics do they share? How do they compete in the current hypercompetitive environment? When do they stop applying to NIH (drop out), even after receiving their first award? Staff from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) delve into these questions in a paper published recently in PLOS ONE , whose findings I’d like to highlight today. Here, Drs. Patricia Haggerty and Matthew Fenton looked at factors that may contribute to the success of early-career investigators and if these factors affect all junior researchers equally.
As highlighted in many previous blog posts and the recent National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report, promoting a strong biomedical workforce is a top priority for the NIH. In 2017, NIH launched the Next Generation Researchers Initiative, which is a multi-pronged approach to increase the number of NIH-funded early stage investigators. An important component of this initiative is the call for increased transparency and availability of data about the make-up of the biomedical research workforce. More complete data will allow NIH leadership to best understand and address the needs of our emerging workforce.
As you may recall, NIH issued guidance for implementing the burden-reducing provisions of the 2018 Common Rule (NOT-OD-18-211). Subsequently on July 20, 2018, the HHS Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) has announced the availability of three draft guidance documents that relate to three burden-reducing provisions
A few weeks ago, we touted the value of the NIH’s Research, Condition, and Disease Classification (RCDC) system to give us consistent annual reporting on official research budget categories and the ability to see trends in spending over time. RCDC’s robust scientific validation process, which allows for such consistency, provides public transparency into over 280 different NIH budget categories.
RCDC categories do not encompass all types of biomedical research. So, how can we get this type of data for other research areas that are not encompassed in RCDC categories, especially those which are newly emerging fields? Are we able to use the same thesaurus-based classification system to explore other research trends?
How Do You Define a “Study” for the Purposes of Providing Information on the PHS Human Subject and Clinical Trial Form?
We recognize that it may be difficult to determine whether two or more closely related protocols should be considered a single study. Generally, if you have research activities that use the same human subjects population, follow the same core research protocol and procedures, and intend to combine the data for analysis in aggregate, this would … Continue reading “How Do You Define a “Study” for the Purposes of Providing Information on the PHS Human Subject and Clinical Trial Form?”