Tools for Biosketch Updates

If you're an NIH researcher, you've probably heard by now that the NIH has released updated guidelines for biosketches in their grant applications. I've noticed a flurry of discussion around, what are these changes and what do they mean? So, first off, you can see the NIH notice here and the NIH has updated their instructional page for their new biosketch format here. 

Luckily, the changes themselves are few and they include the following:

• The title of Section B has changed to "Positions, Scientific Appointments, and Honors"
• Section D, "Additional Information: Research Support and/or Scholastic Performance" has been removed

These changes can elicit a collective groan from NIH researchers who now have to reformat their biosketch for their next submission....unless you are taking advantage of the tools available to you that make these biosketch transitions relatively easy. I'm talking about ORCID and SciENcv.

Yesterday, ORDE held a seminar on Managing Your Biosketch with ORCID and SciENcv. ORCID is serving as the national standard for scholarly registries. Although it takes time to set up on the front end, ORCID can pull publications and grants from a variety of databases, including PubMed and crossref.

Better yet, ORCID can work together with SciENcv to format your biosketch, aligned with the most recent guidelines when you're developing a grant application for the NIH, NSF, or IES, in particular. Additionally, you can make public your most updated biosketch, find other researchers/collaborators, and allow them to find you.

It's important to note that although being set up in ORCID makes updating your biosketch much easier, you should avoid thinking about producing your biosketch on automatic. For each grant application, it's important that you craft your biosketch to respond to the program to which you're applying. Reviewers often report reading the Project Summary or Specific Aims and then flipping to the biosketch to better understand the PI and if they're the best person to do the project. The reviewer is looking for the best project and the best PI to carry it out. So take the time to make sure you're putting your best foot forward for every grant proposal.

Avoid the collective groan next time your grant-making agency announces a format change to the biosketch! To get started setting yourself up in ORCID, below are a variety of tools, including yesterday's e-seminar. 

Resources:

Setup your ORCID: https://orcid.org/signin

Watch this tutorial on SciENcv: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRWy-3GXhtU&feature=youtu.be

e-Seminar on ORCID and SciENcv: https://vimeo.com/529006767

Successful Research Collaborations

Yesterday, we held a great e-seminar with Drs. Hillary Lum and Brianne Bettcher in the CU School of Medicine. We took notes during the talk and came away with a list of great tips that I've shared below. Feel free to watch the seminar video here!

Finding Collaborators:

• Look for gaps in your own knowledge/expertise.
• Identify people who can fill any gaps?
• Draw on other's strengths to complement yours?
• Find collaborators through NIH RePORTER.
• Get connected through mutual colleagues/mentors.
• Check the Colorado Profiles website to find colleagues’ content areas and who they have published with.

Beginning a Collaboration/Grants Considerations:

• Consider how reviewers will see your team vs how it operates when project gets going.
• Consider level of involvement you are seeking from collaborators.
• Think through how to demonstrate and describe the collaboration in grants, perhaps in the grant, in the biosketches, in the letters of support...
• Diverse perspectives/collaborators can take more time on the front end but can allow for a more dynamic/productive team longer term.

Maintaining a Collaboration:

• Trust is especially important with an external collaboration.
• Summarize group meetings in an email afterward to keep folks on the same page.
• Navigating power differentials + distance adds to complexity.
• Reach out to mentors or peers for help and advice.
• Discuss managerial style upfront.
• Have metacommunication - discuss how you will communicate.

Collaboration Pitfalls/Threats:

• Do not assume a collaborator is invested or bought in
• Do not over/underestimate collaborator's strengths.
• Getting clarity/agreement about your role beyond the grant development.
• Threat: Collaborators changing institutions
• Re-set or modify expectations when threats occur.
• Understand how power dynamics might be working to hinder team communication.
• Have face to face meetings when there is conflict (tone can be misinterpreted in email)

Key tips for successful collaboration:

• Build a strong relationship with good communication and having fun!
• Find collaborators you are excited to work with.
• Do the work / do what you said you would do, where your expertise is.
• Create a team charter that outlines vision/values, roles, authorship, decision-making, communication plan, and conflict management plan.

Resources:

Successful Research Collaborations Video

Successful Research Collaborations Resources

Using background research to bolster your case

When reviewers read your grant proposal, sometimes they are not as familiar with the field as you are. This creates a tricky juxtapositioning of your proposal. You must speak to reviewers who are both experts in your field and those who are somewhat familiar.

Building your project case using background research can help you navigate this conundrum. Clearly walking reviewers through the cutting edge research in your field, identifying the gap, and showing how your project will fill that gap can help present a clear case to those with varying levels of project-specific expertise. Below, I offer some tips in presenting background research to create a clear and compelling case.

Make sure you're aware of all relevant research:

Remember, that your reviewers will likely include experts who have conducted research in the same area. Although you may not know who will be reviewing your proposal, if a reviewer is a researcher in your area who has conducted cutting edge research (or knows of some) not reflected in your proposal, it can be bad news for your review. Of course, you can't cite everyone in your proposal, but make sure that you're citing those studies that are most relevant. Definitely make sure that you've reviewed all relevant research before submitting your application.

Highlight your own research:

If you've been one of the researchers contributing to the cutting edge research in your area, be sure to show that. You're not just trying to convince reviewers that your project is brilliant and innovative, but also that you're the best person to complete the research. What better way to show that than to describe how you've been doing this work already?!

Show the gap and why it should be filled:

If you've laid out the cutting edge/background research well in your proposal, it should be obvious that there is a gap. But even if that seems obvious, carry your idea through. Explicitly identify the gap and don't stop there! Explain why this gap needs to be filled and why now. You may feel like you're getting repetitive in stating and re-stating these points, but you want to tie up any loose ends in your case and re-emphasize your key points. As long-time reviewer, Andrew Thorburn, has noted, there's no such thing as making your grant proposal too simple. Remember, reviewers are reading a lot of applications in one sitting and sometimes at the last minute. Reviewers will thank you for conveying your project as simply as possible.

You are probably really excited about your research project. But, why is that? You have been on a journey in your research and discovered a missing link. Without the context for that journey, which is rooted in background research, reviewers will not be able to get excited with you.

Resources:

Background and Significance Sections - ConductScience

How to write a grant proposal - NCBI

It's true, I heart commas!

As our Director of ORDE will attest, I love commas, especially the Oxford comma. Years ago, I read the CNN article, "An Oxford Comma Changed this Court Case Completely." The article discusses how laborers won a dispute against their employers when their contract was deemed ambiguous because it was lacking an Oxford comma. The Technical Writer in me just loves a story where punctuation or lack thereof makes the difference in something big!

But let me back up. Some of you may be wondering, what is the Oxford comma? The Oxford comma is simply the last comma before the conjunction (the "and" or "or") in a series. Below, I draw on an example from the grammarly blog:

Without Oxford comma:
I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.

In this example, I seem to be saying that my parents, whom I love, are Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.

With Oxford comma:
 I love my parents, Lady Gaga, and Humpty Dumpty.

Here, with the oxford comma, I am just listing figures that I love, which include my parents, Lady Gaga, and Humpty Dumpty.

The consequences of leaving out the Oxford comma when I'm simply listing things I love, could be that I'm inadvertently referring to my parents as Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty, and I doubt they would appreciate their new nicknames!

Beyond the Oxford comma, commas, generally, are important. As an example, I'll draw on one of my favorite punctuation books, Eats, Shoots, & Leaves. This book uses a short scenario to show how meaning changes with and without any commas.


A panda bear walks into a bar.

Without commas:
He eats shoots and leaves.

In this first example with no commas, we imagine a bear heading into his local bar for his favorite lunch: shoots and leaves.

With commas:
He eats, shoots, and leaves.

This example creates gorier picture. This disgruntled panda walks into his local bar, and after eating, opens fire and then walks out!

Case closed! Commas and comma usage is important. And, now, in case I haven't yet proved what a nerd I am, I will leave you with a picture and fake quote from the late Alan Rickman.

Resources:
An Oxford Comma Changed this Court Case Completely - CNN
What is the Oxford Comma and Why Do People Care So Much About It? - grammarly blog