科网第一首席顾问,欢迎误入或偷窥。分享 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/RAOH 别人严肃阿拉就觉得搞笑,阿拉严肃别人就觉得搞笑。望编辑别推荐

博文

美国NIH的基金申请没有创新行吗? 精选

已有 11353 次阅读 2011-2-28 13:28 |个人分类:科研教学|系统分类:科研笔记| 创新, 美国, 基金, 申请, NIH

别搞笑了,美国NIH的基金申请没有创新是没戏的!

 

有博文提到,好像美国NIH的基金申请 没有创新也行。这些博文给精选了,影响可能还不小。不得不说,此有误导之弊。希望在科学网上,不会 以讹传讹,乃有此文。

 

现在NIH基金申请的一轮审下来,成功率(payline) 10上下,竞争如此激烈,近几年里新的基金评审标准明确提到创新性,所以没有点创新可以说是没戏的。

 

创新有2种:1)新方法。这种应该是较少的。 新方法好的,马上就流行,也就不新了。 2) 新观点,新角度。 这种应该是较多的。一个老问题从不同的角度看,也是创新。一个“老”蛋白发现了新功能, 也是创新。。。。

 

NIH的基金评审标准见:http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-10-067.html

 

5点:

 

1Significance.  Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field?  If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved?  How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

看课题的重要性

 

2。Investigator(s).  Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project?  If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, do they have appropriate experience and training?  If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? f the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

 

其实就是比文章。刚出道的,要求有降低点。

 

3Innovation.  Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions?  Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense?  Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

 

看创新.  看创新!!! 这significance & Innovation,大家都专门来几段阐明,怕评审的不识货

 

4Approach.  Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?  Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented?   If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed?

 

看申请书的细节了。

 

5Environment.  Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success?  Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed?  Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements? 

 

看环境。但并不是比学校的名气,要不钱都到名校去了。

 



https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-296014-417352.html

上一篇:研究生都可顺手牵羊的写综述?
下一篇:故试:当鸿飞兄见到了鬼。。。or 您有成美国院士的潜质吗?
收藏 IP: 129.111.240.*| 热度|

24 许培扬 刘立 赵明 王晓明 万幼 谢鑫 李学宽 吕喆 杨远帆 张亮生 李福洋 孙学军 高建国 杨正瓴 王群 王力 张天翼 王桂颖 王鸿飞 梁建华 余昕 赵凤光 陈儒军 hushibin

发表评论 评论 (50 个评论)

数据加载中...
扫一扫,分享此博文

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2024-7-18 16:02

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部