NIHR Innovation Observatory’s Post

NIH is simplifying the review process with three new factors for grant assessment.  Factor 1 combines significance and innovation, with the key question being: Should this research be done?  Factor 2 looks at rigor and feasibility—can this project be done on time and on budget? Factor 3, expertise and resources, is simply assessed as sufficient or insufficient, with reviewers providing feedback if more is needed.  Curious how this affects your upcoming grant applications?  I’ll be doing a deep dive into these changes and sharing some success strategies in a free webinar on October 24th. Can’t make it live? Sign up and we'll send you a link to the recording. https://lnkd.in/gd8HjjSb  #NIH #NIHgrants #WomenInAcademia #R01grants #EarlyCareerResearchers #AcademicResearch #ClinicalResearch

A new UKCDR blog has landed! Written by Dr Alison Wallace Simmons, Director of Research at the Medical Research Foundation (UK), this blog explores the Foundation's experience of embedding principles from UKCDR's #EquitablePartnerships guidance (2022) into a major historical research fund. Read to find out how the Foundation has helped support the #ResearchEcosystem and strengthen research relationships between PIs in the UK and Africa, all while allocating funding to meet today's major health challenges. ➡️https://bit.ly/3XuDmE0 #ResearchCapacityStrengthening #PartnershipsForTheGoals #SDGs #InternationalDevelopment #ClimateChange #GlobalHealth

Moving from intention to action. How the Four approaches to equitable partnerships published by UKCDR back in 2022 have helped a funder strengthen research relationships between PIs in the UK and Africa ... and more Have a read 👇 https://bit.ly/3XuDmE0

It's a true joy to support Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) research fellows to share their expertise in more accessible formats. Read this brilliant summary from Alexandra Chung on how researchers collaborated with policymakers to provide targeted evidence for better policy. This example focuses on the critical first 2000 days of childhood. Important lessons for working across disciplines. #publichealth #policy #collaboration #research

This post is part of our #NIGMSFeedbackLoop blog series outlining NIGMS research priorities, funding opportunities, and the grant application process. It discusses post-award requirements principal investigators and institutions must follow to ensure a project remains on track. This post covers answers to the following questions: How do I manage the post-award process? Where is information about a grant award found? How is research progress reported? What grant-related changes need approval? What if I have additional questions during the award period? How can I find more information? Check out our latest NIGMS Feedback Loop blog post to learn more: https://go.nih.gov/fjQ2Dth. #ResearchFunding #FundingOpportunities

I am thrilled to share that I have successfully completed the COPPHA peer reviewing course, offered by Peoples-Praxis, in partnership with Public health Africa and supported by WACREN. This course is part of an important initiative to build capacity in public health, open science and research methodologies, especially for professionals in low- and middle - income countries. Throughout the course, I gained skills in research evaluation, ethical review practices and open publication of scientific findings. I extend my gratitude to Peoples-Praxis, and WACREN for this enriching opportunity. I look forward to applying these skills to make meaningful contributions to public health research and practice. #Learningjourney,#PublicHealth,#ScientificWritting, #PeerReview, #PublicHealthAfrica, #Research.

Check out the toolkits from the NIH Community Engagement Alliance (CEAL) Community Engagement Consultative Resource (CEACR) As part of the CEACR project, CCPH and our partners at the University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute have published three new toolkits to support community-engaged research. CEACR’s toolkits offer expert guidance to help improve research participants’ experiences when you conduct studies. The toolkits provide recommendations to promote participant appreciation, trustworthiness and reciprocity, and equitable compensation. 📋 Engagement Methodologies: Participant Appreciation Practices: https://lnkd.in/gKCrQgnG 📋 Trustworthiness and Research Reciprocity: https://lnkd.in/g9X3tBem 📋 Best Practices for Community Partner Compensation: https://lnkd.in/gU7TbCNA Download all three and share them with your community-engaged research networks. #CEACR #HealthEquity #NIH #CommunityEngagedResearch

Call for Manuscripts: Themed Issue on Institutional Transformation to Support Community Based Participatory Research and Patient- and Community -Engaged Research 🗓️ Submissions due by June 30, 2024. The areas of particular interest for this thematic include but are not limited to: ✅ Development and use of quantitative or qualitative tools/metrics to evaluate institutional contexts and/or evidence of transformation. ✅ Documentation of contextual barriers and facilitators to institutional transformation for community and patient empowerment to participate in and/or lead research. ✅ Original research and case studies that evaluate interventions or strategies to inform generalizable methods that can transform Academic Health Center Research Infrastructures, policies, norms, and practices. ✅ Community perspectives on their own research capacity and roles for research decision-making when working with academic health centers or other research institutes. ✅ Other comparable ideas CCPH Deputy Director, Paige Castro-Reyes will be a guest editor on this themed issue. Learn More: https://ow.ly/J9Ol50RyOJ4 #CommunityEngagedResearch #AcademicHealth #CommunityPerspectives #CommunityBasedParticipatoryResearch

Research is at the core of what we do as an academic health center. Our discoveries improve the way we deliver care, help people live healthier lives, and advance scientific understanding. It also builds our economy and provides a training ground for future scientists, educators, and care providers. Thanks to research—and the critical funding that makes it possible—we can continue collaborating with our communities to tackle unmet needs and improve quality of life. Read the full article: Understanding the True Value of Academic Research https://lnkd.in/gNYEsxRH

Peer reviews can be nerve-wracking, but you have more control over your response than you think you do. When you get your R01 summary statement, stay rooted in your expertise and approach the feedback with curiosity. Go through each critique and ask yourself: DO I AGREE? (Yes, you’re allowed to disagree!) The next steps are simple: make changes in the areas where you agree with your reviewers and better justify your choices in the areas where you disagree. Our team follows this exact method in our Strategic Grant Review service. Want help from us on your NIH R01 resubmission? Apply for a Strategic Grant Review today!  https://lnkd.in/gx863Vvt #NIHGrants #ResearchGrants #NIHFunded #R01Grants #NIH #EarlyCareerResearchers