Thursday, April 22, 2021

Structuring Paragraphs in Your Grant

Oftentimes, writers break to a new paragraph without a lot of thought. When you have a new idea, start a new paragraph is the guideline under which most of us operate. Yet, when we think about it from the reader's perspective, when a paragraph does not contain a complete thought or when a new paragraph makes a giant leap to a new subject without warning, our heads are left spinning!

So, as writers, there are a couple of things we can do to keep our readers from getting lost or frustrated. Using the mnemonic device MEAL, we can remember what should be in most paragraphs...

M - ain idea: This is your topic sentence; it sets up your reader to know what the paragraph is about

E - vidence: Of course, most main ideas need a little justification, so your evidence portion is a couple of sentences that back up your main idea.

A - nalysis: You're writing about this topic, because you have something to say about it, so what is your take on the main idea and the evidence you've cited?

L - ink or Last thought: This is a sentence or two where you conclude your thoughts and/or provide a linking sentence to the next paragraph.

Let's look at an example from an NIH award abstract:

Main  Evidence  Analysis  Link/Last thought

Excessive anxiety and fear leads to anxiety disorders, which impact many aspects of life, from the interpersonal to professional spheres. Although each anxiety disorder has different symptoms, they all share a core feature: mal-adaptive expression of high levels of anxiety. In our study, we will study how the brain suppresses anxiety. Prior studies showed the amygdala is largely responsible for generating high anxiety and fear, while the ventral medial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) decreases these behaviors, possibly by inhibiting amygdala output. Indeed, in humans higher vmPFC activation correlates with lower amygdala activation and decreased anxiety. These data suggest the vmPFC-amygdala pathway may decrease anxiety and fear, but they rely on correlative measures, and can't directly test this hypothesis. We used optogenetics to directly test if the vmPFC-amygdala projection suppresses anxiety and fear. 

Remarkably, optogenetic activation of the vmPFC-amygdala pathway robustly inhibits innate anxiety and learned fear, while inhibition of this pathway increases anxiety.... 

As with any writing rule, there are exceptions and easily-readable paragraphs that leave out one component or another. Yet, when you pull all of the paragraphs together in a section, they should include all of the MEAL components pretty regularly.

In terms of paragraph organization, Otto Yang, in his book, Guide to Effective Grant Writing: How to Write a Successful NIH Grant Application, offers a technique to better construct and organize your paragraphs.  For one section, take the first line of every paragraph and put them together to see if those lead sentences alone give you an understanding of the piece.  This is important especially for grant-writing where reviewers often skim the numerous proposals they review. Giving your reviewers clear sign posts at the start of a paragraph will be much appreciated.

Although these techniques are helpful when you're writing, often they're more useful to apply when you are re-reading and revising.  You've already gotten your thoughts down and they seem to flow, but perhaps you'll realize in making revisions that your reader will have to read half-way through many of your paragraphs before they understand your main point.  In this case, it may serve you and your reader well to apply some paragraph revisions.

Resources:
Paragraphing with the MEAL Plan - Capella University
Paragraphs - University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Writing Center

Thursday, April 15, 2021

The NIMHD

The National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIMHD’s mission is “to lead scientific research to improve minority health and health disparities” (Source: About NIMHD web page). To meet  this mission, the Institute supports external and internal research initiatives. NIMHD also serves as an information source for both the medical community and the US public.

 The Institute’s function dates back to 1990 and the formation of the Office of Minority Programs within the NIH Office of the Director. In 1993, it became the Office  of Minority Programs, and in 2000 was elevated to the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities. The National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities became the official designation in 2010 as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Specific Interests

NIMHD has identified three research interest areas to advance minority health and address health disparities:   1) Clinical and Health Services Research, 2) Integrative Biological and Behavioral Research, and 3) Community Health and Population Sciences. The Institute has also developed a Research Framework Model incorporating factors to be considered when studying minority health and health disparities. This initial model has been modified for specific health disparity populations as well (see Dr. Manson’s edition specific to Native Americans).

Approach

NIMHD supports external research efforts, providing research funding to universities, medical institutions, non-profit, and for-profit organizations. NIMHD advertises specific interests using requests for applications (RFAs), program announcements, and general program descriptions. Internal research efforts are focused on three disease areas associated with significant health disparities: cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and cancer.

 NIH just published the “Minority Health and Health Disparities Strategic Plan 2021-2025”, outlining a variety of specific goals including emphasizing health promotion, increasing intervention research, improving methodology research, training up the next generation of minority health and health disparities researchers, ensuring representation of minority and other health disparity populations in NIH-funded research, and many others.

Agency Organization

Within the structure of NIH, NIMHD has its own Director. The Director, with their leadership team, sets the vision for the Institute and deploys budget resources responsive to that vision. There are three programmatic divisions within the Institute beyond the Office of the Director:

·       Science Programs (including extramural research)

·       Data Management and Scientific Reporting

·       Intramural Research

 The National Advisory Council on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NACMHD) provides guidance on the Institute’s research portfolio and serves in an advisory capacity for the Health and Human Services Secretary, NIH and NIMHD Directors on matters related to the Institute’s mission. The Council has 15 members as well as ex officio members and representatives from other federal agencies.

Resources:

Know Your Agency Brief: NIMHD

NIMHD Know Your Agency e-Seminar

NIMHD Strategic Plan


Friday, April 9, 2021

Submitting Clear and Compelling Publications

Yesterday we held our e-seminar on submitting clear and compelling publications, and as a group we came up with many great tips and strategies. Some of which I share below:

Choosing a journal:

The earlier you can choose a journal to target, the better. This is because, once you know what journal you want to submit to, you can write the article that best fits the journal's aims and scope as well as spend time seeing what their publications tend to look like, allowing you to craft a pub that best fits. When selecting a journal, consider review time, impact factor, as well as the audience you want to reach. Consider reaching out to the Editor before submitting if you have questions that aren't answered on the website or in the guidelines.

Considering audience:

The best writing is that written with the audience in the mind. So, before you put pen to paper, think about who will read it. What information will they be looking for and how do they plan to use it. What background will they have coming to your piece, and what do you need to fill them in on?

Writing tips:

There are many small things to keep in mind that can help improve your writing. Firstly, use active voice if your target journal allows it; it's simply easier to read than the passive alternative. Second, keep your sentences short; when they get to 3-4 lines long, you've probably got a couple sentences merged into one. Third switch up your word choice. I have a tendency to start using my favorite word of the day over and over again, and I don't catch it until I'm reading my draft out loud later on - that's when all the errors jump out!

Writing process:

Feeling out your writing process is half the battle to good writing. Start out by identifying when in your day you write best. Is it first thing in the morning or late at night? Try outlining your manuscript before you start writing. Identify what you want to convey in each section. What are your key points? What background information will your readers need? 

Leave yourself breadcrumbs. Don't button up all of your writing at the end of a writing session, because you'll sometimes find yourself at what feels like an insurmountable wall of a new section when you start writing the next day. Instead, start a new paragraph and stop before you've completed something where you're on a roll. It'll make it that much easier to get going in that next writing session.

Hopefully, these offer you some things to help improve your process of writing and publishing. Below are several resources for more tips and strategies, including our full seminar. Happy writing!

Resources:

e-Seminar: Submitting Clear and Compelling Publications - ORDE

Steven Pinker's 13 Rules for Good Writing

How to Get Published in an Academic Journal - The Guardian

Friday, March 26, 2021

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

Wednesday, March 17, 2021

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:

Thursday, March 11, 2021

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

Wednesday, March 3, 2021

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