Explore the benefits of public-private partnership in NIHs nationwide network of innovators who convert academic discoveries into healthcare solutions. S2. We transformed both RCR controls using an inverse hyperbolic sine (IHS) transformation. If the second A0 is following an unfunded renewal application, remember to also omit the progress report that was included in the initial renewal application. Extramural Research Overview for Fiscal Year 2020 | NIH: National A higher fraction of applications from WH scientists received impact scores in the percentile range correlating with likely funding (Fig. and Conflicts of Interest, Process for Handling Allegations Related to Foreign Despite efforts to promote diversity in the biomedical workforce, there remains a lower rate of funding of National Institutes of Health R01 applications submitted by African-American/black (AA/B) scientists relative to white scientists. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health, My first submission got an overall impact score of 30. Summarizes substantial additions, deletions, and changes to the application. Is one page or less in length, unless specified otherwise in the funding opportunity or is specified differently on our. Therefore, higher or lower award rates can only occur if a topic is systematically favored or disfavored, respectively, across multiple study sections. Find Funding NIH The process for resubmitting an application is exactly the same as the process for your first submission. Five SMEs were given a list of 10 applications from two word2vec clusters (five labeled as group A and five labeled as group B). NOTE: Applicants should check with the relevant Institute or Center (IC), since some do not accept T series applications for all three receipt/review/award cycles. Within-study section variance was similarly computed by sampling from all applications belonging to the topic clusters occupying a given study section. Find Funding NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. ND indicates applications that were not discussed and therefore not scored. We used a probit model to evaluate the probability an application was resubmitted, considering resubmissions in the FY of initial submission and the two subsequent FYs. Sept 5, 2015 - N/A for SBIR/STTR Applications using Standard Due Dates. Did the reviewers' expertise fit your topic? In the topic cluster network, nodes were considered connected if their median distance was at least 0.725. 1). 3A. 4A). Maximizing Investigators' Research Award (MIRA) (R35) Even if you submit your previously reviewed and revised application as new (i.e., second A0), it may still go to the same study section and reviewers are likely to remember it from before. Research (DHSR), How Animals Have Helped Improve Public Health, Why Properly Designed Experiments Are Critical for Animal The program will also help distribute funding more widely among the nation's highly talented and promising investigators. When Are Alternatives to Animals Used in Research? Danthi N. S., Wu C. O., DiMichele D. M., Hoots W. K., Lauer M. S., Citation impact of NHLBI R01 grants funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as compared to R01 grants funded through a standard payline, Percentile ranking and citation impact of a large cohort of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded cardiovascular R01 grants. These results demonstrate the existence of topic preference, meaning that different topics are accorded different levels of acceptance and/or enthusiasm, which may reflect shared, broadly held views on the relative scientific value of different areas of research. You may submit an unfunded application as new again, without a resubmission. Note: Identifying individual changes by using brackets, indents, or change of typography in the text of Specific Aims, Research Strategy, and other application attachments is no longer required, though NIH will continue to accept applications that contain the specific mark-ups. Other application-level variables like FY were dropped. Method The authors used a retrospective cohort study design and retrieved applications submitted in fiscal years 2010-2012 from NIH electronic research administrative sources. We included a binary indicator for applications for which biosketch RCR data were missing (8.7%). CSRs primary role is to handle the receipt and review of ~ 75% of the grant applications that NIH receives. Your resubmission can take one of two paths: revise and request the same study section or revise and request a different study section. 8600 Rockville Pike Fig. You may include a cover letter, though not required. SMEs reproduced the groupings generated by the computational method 97.6% of the time, indicating that there is a very high degree of correlation between word2vec and human judgment. It's better to wait for the next receipt date than send an application prematurely. Funding News Edition: The dashed red line represents the overall R01 award rate (16.3%). Funding and Grants Administration, NIH Loan Repayment Our analysis shows that all three of the factors that underlie the funding gappreference for some topics over others, assignment of poorer scores, and decision to discuss an applicationrevolve around decisions made by reviewers. To collapse application-level data to the applicant level, we used the mean for the RCR variable and years since degree variable, and the mode for the organization-level variables. Don't hesitate to make other changes. The Key Dates section of many funding opportunities indicate standard dates apply. We also controlled for evidence of past accomplishment on the part of the applicant by including both the median RCR for papers listed in the biosketch and the number of those papers that fall in the top decile of RCR values (21). National Institutes of Health (NIH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892. Thereafter, the application must be submitted as a new application. There are specific guidelines on how and when to resubmit your application. Lets begin with looking at award rates: as a reminder, award rates are the total number of awards divided by the total number of applications. For A0 applications that were not discussed, the A1 award rate was between 12% and 22% quite low, but not zero. If you are on a list for possible selective pay or end-of-year funding, resubmitdon't wait to see what will happen. Hutchins B. I., Yuan X., Anderson J. M., Santangelo G. M., Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. We ranked topic clusters by funding rates, i.e., the proportion of applications funded from quintile 1 (highest success) to quintile 5 (lowest success), to obtain equal numbers of topics in each quintile (n = 30 topics). National Library of Medicine The SMEs were then asked to partition a randomized set of 10 applications to the two groups, again using the title, abstract, and specific aims. As an independent method of controlling for organization-level characteristics, we used separate binary indicators for each applicant organization to more directly compare AA/B and WH applications from the same organization. If reviewers are unable to make accurate predictions at the level of individual grants, then it seems unlikely that they would be able to do so for particular topics. NIH separates the review process from funding decisions. Standard Due Dates | grants.nih.gov The applicants used formatting and sectioning to highlight key points and make it easier for reviews to read the text. Do not markupchanges withinapplication attachments (e.g., do not highlight, color, bold or italicize changes in Research Strategy). 3C and fig. At both ends of this distribution, 56 clusters have an award rate that differs significantly from average (25 high and 31 low, P < 0.01; table S6). Effect of removing variables from regression models (awarded given discussed). But be careful not to assume that the reviewers were the problemfirst thoroughly size up the application's faults that they identified. Parenting is one of the most complex and challenging jobs you'll face in your lifetime -- but also the most rewarding. After an unsuccessful submission and/or resubmission of a renewal application, your only option for a subsequent application is to submit as a new application. and transmitted securely. Funding rate is a person-based statistic that is calculated by the number of distinct funded investigators divided by the number of distinct funded and unfunded investigators in a given fiscal year, excluding applications withdrawn prior to review. Contributed to the writing/editing to the paper: T.A.H., A.L., K.A.W., R.A.M., M.J.P., A.F.D., M.S.L., H.A.V., J.M.A., and G.M.S. Therefore, make sure you have taken reviewers' suggestions into consideration when writing your application. When you prepare a resubmission (A1) application, be sure to address reviewer concerns, highlighting your responses to their comments in a one-page introduction. While you can submit a renewal resubmission application after an unsuccessful renewal application, you cannot submit a second renewal application following an unsuccessful renewal application. Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) - HHS ORI Resources, Applicant Guidance: Next Steps (Your application was reviewed; what to do next), NIH/AHRQApplicationSubmission/Resubmission Policy. Check again that your Specific Aims line up with your hypothesis. In addition, real-world data may not provide sufficient power to calculate statistical interactions when a large number of variables act on a relatively small population. Cumulatively, the lower submission rates, lower average discussion rates, and lower impact scores result in applications from AA/B scientists receiving R01 funding at approximately half the rate (0.5-fold) of those from WH scientists (Fig. Review Branches (RBs) are clusters of study sections based on scientific discipline. Details can be found in Guide Notice NOT-OD-18-197: The NIH will not accept a resubmission application that is submitted later than 37 months after the submission of the new application that it follows. If you applied to a program announcement (PA), program announcement with set-aside funds (PAS), or program announcement with special receipt, referral and/or review considerations (PAR), you may resubmit to the same or a different PA, PAS, or PAR. (OLAW), Strategic Management and Contracts From each document, we first concatenated the text of the title, abstract, and specific aims. The goal of MIRA is to increase the efficiency and efficacy of NIGMS funding. Topics favored by AA/B applicants compared to topics with no AA/B applicants. You only have one opportunity to resubmit, so make it your best shot. The discovery of topic preference next led us to ask whether AA/B and WH applicants tend as groups to study the same or different topics. Use the forms from the most current funding opportunity announcement, and scan the funding opportunity announcement to see if anything has changed. For any given A0 overall impact score, A1 award rates are higher for Type 2 applications. Before you begin a new (A0) application in the same vein as a prior application, take a hard look at whether another attempt using the same idea is likely to result in funding. In a resubmission however, you can provide additional information which is intended to address reviewer concerns and improve your score. Applications are reviewed in study sections (Scientific Review Group, SRG). Applications with similar content are assigned to multiple study sections, ranging from 1 to 49 study sections per topic (fig. HHS Vulnerability Disclosure | Technical Issues: E-mail OER Webmaster, An official website of the United States government, The new seed.nih.gov has everything youre looking for about the, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, NIH's Technical and Business Assistance Program, Concept to Clinic Commercializing Innovation (C3i) Program, Regulatory & Business Development Consultations, Supplemental Funding to Diversify the Entrepreneurial Workforce, Academic Entrepreneurship and Product Development Programs, NIH Research Evaluation and Commercialization Hubs (REACH), NIH Centers for Accelerated Innovation (NCAI), Search Technologies from Academic Centers and Hubs, Diversifying the Entrepreneurial Workforce, Apply for Partnering & Investment Opportunities, NIH small business research and development programs (SBIR & STTR), product development and commercialization support for NIH award recipients. You could start revising before you get your summary statement if you have promising new data or other improvements you want to include. E-mail OER Webmaster, An official website of the United States government, If you do not see your activity code, check your funding opportunity or the, P01P20P30P40P41 P42 P50P51P60PL1 PN1PN2P2CPM1, T14T15T32T34T35T37T90TL1 TU2T01T02T09T42TL4, G07, G08, G11, G12, G13, G20, R24, S06, S11, S21, S22, SC1, SC2, SC3, UG1, U10, U19, U24, U2C, U41, U42, U45, U54, U56, K01K02 K05K06K07K08K12K14K18 K22K23K24K25 K26K30K99KL1 KL2 KD1KM1K21K43K76K00K38, R03, R21, R33, R21/R33, R34, R36, U34, UH2, UH3, UH2/UH3, D43D71DP1DP2F05F30F31F32F33G07G08G11G12G13G20K01K02 K05K06K07K08K12K14K18 K22K23K24K25 K26K30K99KL1 KL2 L30L32 L40 L50L60 M01P01P20P30P40P41 P42 P50P51P60PL1 PN1PN2R00R01R03R13R15R18R21R24 R25R33R34R37R41R42R43R44R55 R56R90RL1 RL2 RL5 RL9 RS1S06S10S11S21S22 SC1SC2SC3T14T15T32T34T35T37T90TL1 U01U09U10U13U18U19U24U2GU2RU42U44U45U54U56U82UC6UC7UH1UL1 UT1UT2VF1X01X02C06E11F37F38G94HD4H13H25H50H57H62H64H75H79KD1R30R36R49TU2T01T02T09T42UA1UC1UD1UR6UR8US3US4U11U17U1AU1QU1VU21U22U23U27U30U32U36U38U41U43U47U48U49U50U51U52U53U55U57U58U59U60U61U62U65U66U75U79U81U83U84U90VF1U34UH2UH3X98I01UE1UE2DP3RC1UC2RC2RC3UC3X99RC4UC4KM1DP4S07K21DP5UP5U1BUM1SI2UA5RF1UF1R28UF2DP7IK3P2CU2CPM1RM1UM2TL4UG1R35UH4FI2UG4K43SB1UB1R61UG3R50K76OT2F99K00I80R38K38UE5H23H28R2FU2FR16U3RFM1U86U87, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Information for NIH Applicants and Recipients of NIH Funding, Applicant/Recipient COVID-19 Update History, Get the latest research information from NIH, Supporting a Safe and Respectful Workplace, NIH Regional Seminars on Program Funding and Grants Administration, NIH Loan Repayment Program (LRP) Contact & Engage, NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare Workshops & Conferences, SEED Events (for the innovator community), Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration (OPERA), Office of Research Reporting and Analysis (ORRA), Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW), Strategic Management and Contracts Office (SMCO), Office of Electronic Research Administration (eRA), Division of Communication & Outreach (DCO), Small Business Education and Entrepreneurial Development (SEED), Division of Biomedical Research Workforce (DBRW), Division of Human Subjects Research (DHSR). Together, these two observations suggest that AA/B scientists may be proposing to study a different distribution of topics than other applicants. S4). The NIH data permit a comparison of success rates (share of applications that are successful) between new applicants and previous winners. Notably, AA/B applicants tend to propose research on topics with lower award rates. A resubmission is an unfunded application that has been modified following initial review and resubmitted for consideration. Another possible cause, the Matthew effect, is not mutually exclusive with implicit bias and may reflect a broader challenge faced by peer review in meeting the goal of identifying the most meritorious applications. Keep in mind you might not have a study section choice for some funding opportunity announcements, e.g., PARs. community), Office of Policy for Extramural Research An understudied aspect of the R01 application process is the degree of correlation, if any, between funding outcomes and the topics that scientists propose to investigate. But if changes are so extensive that most text would be affected, explain them in the introduction only. Table S1. 3 SBIR Awards at NIH - National Center for Biotechnology Information The following pointers should help as you prepare your A1 resubmission or second A0 application. Use this summary of NIH's April 21, 2021 Open Mike blog post, NIAID information, and RePORT links. Half the reason for writing this time is to allow you a forum on our site to comment on what the new NIH resubmission policy means for the NIA community. Next, we substituted and replaced noun phrases as single tokens that were present in the entire corpus. Li and Samulski used underlining to show reviewers where the text had changed, while Dr. Faubion used yellow highlighting. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of many NIH staff: J. Lun and T. Flock of the NIH Scientific Workforce Diversity Office for assistance in writing and coordination; R. Harriman of the NIH Office of Portfolio Analysis for data acquisition and analysis; and J. Wang, L. Roberts, and staff members in the Statistical Analysis and Reporting Branch of the NIH Office of Extramural Research for assistance with statistical analyses. Simply re-stating your original arguments without providing new data will not improve your score. Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies Clusters were initially defined based on content similarity; thus, clusters that are numerically close also tend to have relatively similar content. If you've submitted two applications, NIAID can still fund the earlier one. Even if you take all these steps, you have no guarantee of success for several reasons: That said, many people get funded after revising, and usually a resubmission can't hurt you. S7. This observation deserves further investigation, especially since it appears to be a prevalent feature of the NIH peer review process. Find contacts and instructions at When to Contact an NIAID Program Officer. Renewal/resubmission/revision and AIDS-related applications may have different due . Responds to the issues and criticism raised in the summary statement. Workplace, NIH Regional Seminars on Program We calculated the percentage difference at each step based on the rate of change for applications from AA/B scientists over the rate of change for applications from WH scientists (e.g., applications from AA/B scientists are discussed at a rate of 44.0%, compared with 57.4% for WH scientists: 44.0/57.4% = 76.6%). The AME represents the average value of the marginal effect of the independent variable (e.g., AA/B applicant) on the dependent variable (e.g., probability the application is awarded). sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal K99/ R00 NIH Pathway to Independence Award - National Institute of Application content was analyzed using word2vec as described above, and intercluster relatedness (distance) was measured between the median of one cluster and another. In this way, in the preceding sentences, we would replace both NLP and natural language processing with a single token: natural_language_processing. In addition, we substituted for known terms and phrases in the National Library of Medicines Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) vocabulary. Award recipients are expected to compete successfully for independent R01 support during the R00 phase. In contrast, applications not discussed at the A0 stage have less than a 10% chance of being funded. AA/B and WH scientists who received lower (more favorable) impact scores (10 to 40) resubmitted applications at approximately the same rate; in the 41 to 50 (less favorable) impact score range, AA/B scientists were less likely to resubmit than WH scientists, but this difference is not statistically significant (Fig. There was therefore a trend among AA/B applicants to submit applications on topics that experience lower funding rates, irrespective of the study section to which they were assigned (Fig. Reporting, Research Training and Career See what worked for our two resubmission Sample Applications: Notice how they approached the reviewers in their applications and how it reflects our advice above: If you decide against resubmitting or your resubmission application doesnt work out, you may want to assess your other Options if Your Application Isn't Funded. Specifically, we first substituted for acronyms that were defined in the text via parentheticals and present in at least five documents. This browser is not supported - Some features might not work. Figure 1 shows the award rate of these A0 applications broken out by type 1 (de novo) vs type 2 (competing renewals). Award rates by topic cluster size. Notably, the award rates of cluster-defined topics varied from a minimum of 7.5% to a maximum of 28.7% (see below). Warning! Reviewer demographics for all study section meetings that considered R01 applications (FY 20112015). Your email address will not be published. Table S8. What can be done to Promote Research Integrity? R01 Applications from Early Stage Investigators Understand Paylines and Percentiles | NIH: National Institute of We offer two samples R01 resubmission applications that scored well. Scientific influence for higher and lower success topics. When successful, this allows words that are close to each other semantically to be close to each other in the embedding space. From FY 20112015, AA/B scientists submitted R01 applications at 83.7% the frequency of WH applicants (Fig. Read more about timing at Timelines and Due Dates. NOTE: See Key Dates section of funding opportunity to determine if AIDS dates apply. Once the training stabilized, we computed document vectors by taking the sum of the TF-IDF (term frequencyinverse document frequency) times the embedding vector for each unique word in the document. Therefore, given equal opportunity, AA/B new investigators quickly reduce the gap in production of influential papers relative to WH new investigators. The data is not completely capture submission behavior. Of the six initial decision points we chose to study in the NIH R01 application pipeline, three make a significant contribution to the funding gap between AA/B and WH applicants. If you wait to submit for the Cycle 3 receipt dates (May Council) instead, you could lose just a month or two before you actually get an award. Toward Independence: Resubmission Rate of Unfunded National - LWW We identified whether applicants were new investigators using the new investigator flag in IMPAC II and considered all other applicants as established investigators. As a refresher, the new resubmission policy means that after . Fig. Assignment of a document to a cluster was made by finding the closest meta centroid. There is also no evidence that IC scorebased or discretionary funding decisions correlate with an applicants race. NIH: What is a "resubmission"? - Academia Stack Exchange Both applications include a summary of critiques and changes made in response. And whats the likelihood Ill eventually get this funded?. WH applicants also experienced lower award rates in these clusters, but the disparate outcomes between AA/B and WH applicants remained, regardless of whether the topic was among the higher- or lower-success clusters (fig. As might be expected, we see a strong gradient: applicants were much more likely to resubmit the better their overall impact score. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Using AI in Peer Review Is a Breach of Confidentiality, More Early Stage Investigators Supported in FY 2022, Check Out These Public Federal Funding Databases to Learn More About Funding at NIH and Other Federal Agencies. Fig. These topics include research at the community and population level, as opposed to more fundamental and mechanistic investigations; the latter tend to have higher award rates. Even if your resubmission scores slightly worse, that probably won't affect the funding chances of an earlier application. Does anyone with an undiscussed grant bother to resubmit? Keep in mind you might not have a study section choice for some funding opportunity announcements, e.g., PARs. An official website of the United States government, Application Requirements for Resubmission Applications, NIH Were they knowledgeable about your methods? See how. Make sure your introduction does the following: Summarizes the substantial additions, deletions, and changes to the application. Mathematical modeling indicates that this discrepancy is not due to an insignificant number of AA/B Ph.D. graduates, but rather to a dearth of postdoctoral fellows transitioning into faculty positions (33). Revising and Requesting the Same Study Section. NIMH Career Development Programs (K-Series) However, the NIH application and award process is complex, and at least some of the factors that contribute to success are likely to be correlated. Guide for Grants and Contracts, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Information for NIH Applicants and Recipients of NIH Funding, Applicant/Recipient COVID-19 Update History, Get the latest research information from NIH, How to Apply Video Together, these three factors account for 43.2% of the modeled difference at this stage. Reviewers are critical to our mission to see that NIH grant applications receive, fair, independent, expert, and timely scientific reviews. Starting from the full set of 150 clusters, we iteratively merged clusters together in order of word2vec similarity under the constraint that no merged clusters comprised more than 5% of the application totals. Distribution of topics across study sections. Adding the 89 topic superclusters (see below) to the model reduced this gap by 9%. NIH Pathway to Independence Award. To rule out the possibility that separating applications into topic areas reveals a previously unidentified predictive power of percentile score, we asked whether publications resulting from R01 awards in higher- and lower-success clusters differ in their scientific influence, as measured either by the Relative Citation Ratio [RCR; an article-level metric that measures the influence of an individual publication relative to its cocitation network (21)] or by the number of raw citations they receive per year. Try using a different browser such as Chrome, Edge, Firefox, or Safari. Success rates are defined as the percentage of reviewed grant applications* that receive funding. All - new, renewal, resubmission, revision, G07, G08, G11, G12, G13, G20, R24, S06, S11, S21, S22, SC1, SC2, SC3, UG1, U10, U19, U24, U2C, U41, U42, U45, U54, U56 Rocket charts depict the number of applications that were submitted, discussed, and funded per applicant. The following pointers should help as you prepare your A1 resubmission or second A0 application. Figure 3 shows the award rates for A1s according to the A0 overall impact score. However, the 2011 study that originally reported this result did not control for the influence of impact score on resubmission (3, 9). Sometimes waiting has little impact on the timing of an award. Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work, but all are employees or contractors for the NIH. While the typical approach is to enumerate a list of stop-words to be excluded, we leveraged the power of word2vec to de-emphasize the importance of these words and all semantically similar words in a more nuanced fashion.
