Nuts and Bolts of NIH NRSA
Fellowship Applications:
March 4, 2008
Libby O’Hare
Ph.D. Candidate, Neuroscience
UCLA GWC Writing Consultant
Outline
Part 1: Pre-doctoral NRSA Application Overview
Part 2: Focus on the Research Training Plan
Part 3: Focus on the Background and Significance Section
-tips and strategies for literature reviews
Part 4: Focus on the Methods and Experimental Design Section
-tips and strategies for methods sections
Part 5: Making Your Research Plan More Competitive
Part 6: Common Reviewer Complaints
Part 1: NRSA Application Overview
Applicant Section
 Demographic & Administrative
Information

Research Training Plan

NIH Biographical Sketch

Short Essays
 Item 19: Project Description
 Item 20: Training and Career
Goals
 Item 27: Previous Research
Experience
Sponsor Section
 Biographical Sketch

List of Grants and Previous
Trainees

Training Plan (research
environment and facilities)

Letter of Support (applicant’s
qualifications and potential)
Demographic and Administrative
Information

Somewhat self-explanatory

Consult instructions booklet and the following websites

UCLA Office of Contracts and Grants:
www.research.ucla.edu/ocga


Entity Identification Number, DUNS Number, ERA Commons sign-up
UCLA Grad Division:
www.gdnet.ucla.edu/gss/postdoc/nihadmin.htm


Official in Business Office
Information on obtaining required signatures
Research Training Plan

Specific Aims

Background/Significance/Literature Review

Preliminary Data

Research Design and Methods
 Human Subjects
 Vertebrate Animals

Literature Cited

Responsible Conduct of Research
Applicant Biographical Sketch

Similar to a CV, but with a NIH specific format and additional
required information

Requires special form

Education/training

Research Positions and Honors

Publications

Scholastic Performance
 Chart reproducing your undergraduate and graduate academic
transcripts
Short Essays

Item 19: Project Summary and Relevance to NIH mission
 Succinct summary of project that can stand alone
 Broad goals and health-relatedness
 Informative and understandable to a scientifically literate audience
 2-3 sentence lay language summary of the relevance of the project to
public health

Item 20: Career and Training Goals
 How will the proposed training enable you to reach your career goals?
 Identify skills, theories, conceptual approaches to be learned or
enhanced during the proposed award period

Item 27: Research Experience
 Chronological summary of prior research experience
 Focus on scientific questions and conclusions, rather than exhaustive
list of methodologies
Sponsor Section

Biographical Sketch


In a specific NIH format, most advisors have these handy
Research Support

In table format, list of all current and pending research support (financial
information)

List of Previous Trainees

Letter of Reference

Training Plan, Environment, Research Facilities

Describe classes, seminars, and other opportunities for scientific and professional
development (ethics classes should be described within the Research Training
Plan)
 Describe the research environment and available facilities and equipment
 Describe the skills and techniques the applicant will learn during the fellowship
period, and the relation between these and the applicant’s career goals
Part 2: Research Training Plan
Specific and standard format:

Specific Aims

Background/Significance/Literature Review

Preliminary Data

Research Design and Methods

Human Subjects

Vertebrate Animals

References

Responsible Conduct of Research
(1) Broad Summary Statement of
Project
•
1-2 paragraphs
•
Place the overall research question in perspective
•
Attention grabbing
•
Use lay language and avoid references when possible
(2) Specific Aims and Hypotheses
•
Usually 2-5 specific aims are listed
•
Identify the project goals and main hypotheses to be
tested
•
Should list aims using numbers and simple, specific
sentences
•
Helpful to use different formatting tools (boldface,
italics) to identify specific aims and hypotheses
(3) Background and Significance
•
Review of the current literature relevant to the proposed project
•
Putting the research question into perspective
•
Explicit explanation of the potential scientific impact of the project
•
How does your research question address a hole in the literature
(how is your question novel)?
•
What progression of experiments that led to your project?
•
Clear and well organized--use subheadings where possible
(4) Preliminary Data
•
If applicable and available
•
If included, should be brief
•
Use images, graphs, tables
•
Main goal is to demonstrate that you can perform the
technique/analysis/procedure you are proposing
•
Secondary goal is to indicate that your initial data is coming out as
expected
(5) Methods and Experimental Design
•
Description of research design
•
Include information on:
-Materials
-Subjects
-Instruments
-data collection procedures
-data analysis methods
•
Look at previous grant proposals from your lab to get a sense of
the scope and details needed
(6) Expected Results and Possible
Caveats
•
What are your expected results?
•
Given these results, what is your interpretation?
•
How does this interpretation fit with the concepts you have
developed in the background and significance section?
•
What are potential confounds or caveats in your experimental
design?
•
Discuss alternative approaches that may be used to address
these confounds and caveats
(7) Broad Conclusions and Implications
•
1-2 paragraphs
•
Place the overall research question in perspective
(yes, again!)
•
Spell out exactly how the proposed research will
advance the field
•
Use lay language and avoid references when possible
Part 3: Writing the Background and
Significance Section
•
Function
•
Types and Styles
•
Tips and Strategies
Functions of Literature Reviews
•
Placing the current study within the wider disciplinary conversation
•
Illustrates the novelty and importance of the project
•
Explains how your research questions and/or research approach is
different from those previously published
•
Justifies your methodology
•
Demonstrates your familiarity with the topic and your ability to study
it successfully
Types of Literature Reviews
•
Exhaustive history: chronological review of previous studies that lead
to the current project
•
Replication: description of current state of knowledge, or
methodology; also argues for additional verification or possible
variation (i.e. different sample population)
•
Missing pieces: description of current state of knowledge with
identification of gaps in the field; argues how current research will
address these gaps
•
Positional: identification of various arguments, trends, and debates in
field; situates the proposed research within that context and then
stakes out the study’s position
**some lit reviews include aspects of all of these**
Tips and Strategies
•
Categorize your sources into topic clusters
•
Look for trends and themes and synthesize related information:
• Develop the positions that are relevant for your project
• Build on conclusions that have led to your project
• Identify holes due to flawed assumptions or improper methods
•
Include a certain amount of simple reporting of previous results, but
remember
• You are writing discursive prose
• Your primary goal is to critique
• Focus on justifying your research questions and methodology
Part 4: Writing the Methods and Experimental
Design Section
•
Functions
•
Suggested Format
•
Critical Questions
•
Human Subjects and Vertebrate Animals Considerations
•
Responsible Conduct of Research
Functions of Methods Sections
•
Describe the overall methodological approach
•
Illustration of how methods will answer your research
questions
•
Development of rationale or scientific strategy
•
Description of specific methods of data collection
•
Explanation of data analysis methods/strategies
•
Address potential limitations and interpretations
Suggested Format
Specific Aim #1
Rationale:
•
how does this design relate to your overall hypothesis?
Methods:
•
data collection, data quality control, data management, statistical
analysis
Expected Results:
•
How will you interpret the expected outcome?
•
What are some different possible outcomes?
•
How will these be different outcomes be interpreted and
addressed?
(repeat for each specific aim)
Critical Questions

Are the methods I chose feasible and within my competence?

Did I address difficulties I may encounter with the proposed
approaches, show I can handle them, and propose solutions and
alternatives?

Did I consider how the limitations of the approaches may affect my
results and data?

Did I describe the kinds of results I expect?

Did I show I am aware of the limits to and value of the kinds of
results I expect?

Did I define the criteria for evaluating the success or failure of each
experiment?
Human Subjects and Vertebrate
Animal Research

Much of this information will be identical to that submitted to the
UCLA IRB

Consult with your advisor to determine the best way to approach this
section
Responsible Conduct of
Research

Short statement describing any ethics training you will participate in

This type of class is required of all graduate programs receiving NIH
funding, so there should be a course in your department that will
satisfy this requirement

Can also describe informal means of training
Part 5: Making Your Research Plan
More Competitive
(A)
Opening statement
(B)
Summary and integration of background literature
and preliminary data (if applicable)
(C)
Possible caveats and confounds
(D)
Final take-home message
(A) Opening Statement
•
1-2 paragraphs
•
By placing the overall research question in perspective
in lay language you can get the attention of your
reader immediately
•
Shows that you have a sense of the “big-picture”
implications behind your research
(B) Summary and Integration of
Background Literature and Preliminary
Studies
•
In the literature review you discussed the current state
of knowledge and highlighted the missing pieces of the
scientific story
•
Your preliminary data illustrates that your methods are
a sound approach for tackling these missing pieces
•
You have illustrated how previous research remains
insufficient, AND how your preliminary data has
positioned you to make the advance that your field
needs!
(C) Expected Results and Possible
Caveats (within Methods)
•
What are potential confounds or caveats in
your experimental design?
•
What are alternative approaches?
•
This section illustrates your ability to think
critically about your project and your
experimental design
(D) Take-home Message
•
State exactly how the proposed research will advance
the field
•
Shows that you have a sense of the “big-picture”
implications behind your research
Part 6: Common Reviewer
Complaints
•
Lack of original or novel ideas
•
Scientific rationale not valid
•
Project lacks focus, studies are not logically related,
experiments do not follow from one another
•
Proposed studies based on shaky hypotheses
•
Alternative hypotheses are not considered
•
Proposed experiments are descriptive and do not test
specific hypotheses
Common Reviewer/Reader
Complaints
•
Lack of alternative methodological approaches in case
the primary approach does not work out
•
Insufficient methodological detail to suggesting
applicant doesn’t know what she/he are doing
•
No recognition of potential problems and pitfalls
•
Proposal lacks critical literature references, reviewers
think that applicant does not know the literature
Summary

Pre-doctoral NRSA Application Overview

Overview of Research Training Plan Components

Writing the Background and Significance Section and the
Methods Section

Making Your Research Plan More Competitive

Common Reviewer Complaints
NIH Grant Writing Resources
NIH Center for Scientific Review:
http://cms.csr.nih.gov/ResourcesforApplicants/
UCLA Grant Writing Resources
Graduate Writing Center (GWC)
Individual Writing Consultation Appointments
http://gsa.asucla.ucla.edu/gsrc/gwc/index.htm
Grad Division’s Extramural Fellowship Proposal Consultants
Dr. Chuck Olmstead (physical and life sciences)
310-835-5094
brainone@ucla.edu
Acknowledgements
UCLA Graduate Writing Center
Marilyn Gray
Christine Wilson