Transcript of "Tips for Writing Research Proposals to the NIH"
Transcripts are required for video posted on www.montana.edu. This is the only way to make video or audio content accessible to someone who is deaf and/or blind. This transcript can be converted into Braille, or read by a screen reader or visually read.
Well hello, my name is Sue Higgins and welcome to the first of our four quarterly health equity webinars webinars offered by NIH funded institutions at Montana State University today's webinar is entitled tips for writing research proposals to the National Institutes of Health present this presented live there's several in the room here but for those of you out there on WebEx the only thing you're going to be seeing today are the slides you're not going to see people in the room and we're gonna ask you to save all questions till the end and for those WebEx just send in a chat using the chat function look at your afterwards and just so you know this entire session session is recorded so if you want to come back and lift and again we'll send that link to you we're very lucky to have two fine and aged funded health equity researchers presenting today dr. Alexander Alexander Adams MD ph.d is the director of the Center for American Indian and rural health equity at Montana State University she came to us from the University of Wisconsin where she was a professor and a researcher with the Department of Family Medicine and the graduate program in nutritional sciences she's held several positions in two community-based and health disparities research these include her past roles as director of the collaborative Center for health equity and director of the UW cancer centers cancer health disparities initiative she maintains an active research agenda in childhood obesity in American Indian communities dr. Adams received your MD from the University of Illinois College of Medicine and her PhD in neutral Sciences from the University of Illinois urbana-champaign she'll be followed by dr. Elizabeth rink a Montana State University professor who conducts research with indigenous communities in Montana Greenland and Finland through NIH and other funding dr. rink conducts her we are here now a sexual and reproductive and amaya for American Indian youth and their families on the Fort Peck reservation in northeastern Montana in addition dr. rink has been named a Fulbright Arctic initiative scholar to help advance Arctic nations shared interest in building resilient communities and sustainable economies search and that Adams has relied on community participatory research a framework that ensures too little oversight and guidance in all phases of the research study dr. rink received her doctorate in public health from Oregon State University and holds a master's degree in social work from the University of Wisconsin me Washington thank you both for sharing your knowledge today and I'm gonna turn it over to these amazing people thanks everybody for being being here today thanks sue I'm gonna start on this disembodied voices welcome to everybody out there in TV land so we're gonna talk today about what makes a successful NIH grant and Beth and I and Suzanne did this with a number of investigators at our bridging the gap conference last summer and had some good response and so we thought we would do this again for you guys um because that was a kind of a closed meeting the examples are coming out these grants my ro1 from NHL ended actually in 2018 because we did an extension year bets which is going and Susan switches in its last year Suzanne unfortunately couldn't be with us today because she's on a plane so we will be kind of coughing someone for slides and I also want to thank the NIH program officers that were with us at that Institute last summer bridging the gap because we've used some of their concepts as well in our slides so the first steps to writing an edge grant are to make sure that the deadline is not next month because this is a long process particularly with communities I'm gonna say even if you've been working with communities along allow at least nine months lead time to writing your first ro1 we'll talk through what that looks like the other one that I get a question from a lot from investigators is who should my co-investigators be because you've got to make sure you got the right Co eyes onboard you need to have expertise in the areas that you don't and they need to and sometimes if it's your first one you probably want some senior there so they can see that you're going to be mentored and how to do that the next piece is ensure that your community engagement work is ongoing so in other words this is the CBP are part right there helping design the project making sure that they're gonna write letters to support all those pieces that are really having it need to be going the other critical thing to remember as a new investment he's never written in ro1 before you get new investigator status which means you get that a score and still get funded so wants you to be a COPI up on a grant and their senior you will give up that new inator status and have to go and get their lower score so unless it's really really important try not to give that out because it's really key and you only get it once once done it is one and done and then the other piece that I see a lot it's ensure that you have adequate preliminary data but don't spend five eight years collecting it so that you're afraid to put in your first grant because you need to start putting in grants find a good support system for assembling all the pieces the center's have good support systems good fiscal support from your department or your Center good support of who the people who are gonna be helping you find the letters of support um we have template pieces that care for things like abilities and environment pieces those are really important and lastly don't be afraid of failure because every guess rescore at least once multiple times have to win some time but also don't be afraid of success so you don't actually put these in I wanted to do a look at our page lengths and what got funded just so you could kind of have an idea the aims page is always one page the significance is barri as you can see innovation varies and we'll show you a little bit why and the approach is in that sort of 90 range always you need to be a summary we're going to go through each of these sections kind of interns that you can take a look at how they look and we're going to give you examples how they look another piece to know is formatting the vast majority of people who are reviewing this will be look either no and they're over 45 and so the wearing glasses and you need to make sure that they can see things and read them easily sometimes they're on the plane on the way to the NIH review section so the easier this is for them to read with good subheadings white spaces and cables and diagrams I'm more likely you are to get funded and that's just a fact of life so more is left actually if in terms of this and we're going to show you that so the aims page by far the most important page you're gonna revise this page no less than 15 times so that's not to say that's scary but just to say that you're gonna have lots of people looking at that you should stop that first start sending that out this is a page you might send a program officers while you're trying to choose where you're gonna go which Institute and important so we've kind of broken it down into a template of how it could look the paragraph generally is why you would um want to do this study what's epidemiology behind this and please put in some of your data here this is how you can slip in some of like I actually know how to do what I'm doing the second paragraph is really what you're gonna do and why it's novel and why you and then here's an example our five year history of this kind of Reese with these community partners makes us position two I nearly lead a two-armed RCT of X versus X examining determinants so everything is in that sentence that's a real good way to kind of set and then you've got two or three eight want to use action verbs you don't want they explore or those kinds of things unless you're writing and r21 so this is kind of ro1 land here that we're talking if you're doing a randomized control you might want to put that into aim one or aim to and you always want to put the hypotheses if you're testing in there and then aim three i've always put in for us type project some kind of processor fidelity or our measures or dissemination planning I want to end strong with a good sentence about like what we care what are the short long term and maybe on public implications of the work so here are some problems things that really get you scored lower if civic don't test hypotheses that you'd list it for one depends if aim one is uncle you will not be able to do that aim to work or they're not connected so this is where it gets really tricky if to be connected but not dependent on each other which is really really hard um so yeah that's a little bit of one of those like Zen columns almost but to try and figure that out so the significance this is used to be a longer section you've got a much more space to put a huge background section but here you really don't have much time we're suggesting a page maybe a page and a half and here's some sort of samples you can do a paragraph over viewing the study what does the study goodness what's it gonna contain and the gaps they really want to literature gaps we're filling these three Creek literature gaps you might have some epidemiology of that study particularly in your study population particularly if I did it that's awesome and then are using cvpr or some unique methodology make sure that that's at least put in here and other studies that have done that as well as you so here's an example from Beth research overview of the study and the gaps that he fills such a reproductive health emerging communities very little work done on that what are the multiple complex factors that influence this and then that there's a lack of research on tribal detailer ecological interventions just multi-level interventions addressing this for youth you can do your abbreviations here so that you can put those later so then why is this work important it goes in section so again make sure you're justifying and that you've got some data to show that this study population needs this intervention if it's already read that multiple times but not in this population you need to really justify why it needs to be done in this pub and how again this is the gap its what gaps and your project moving it feels forward and then situate it in the existing literature why are you the person to do this research because another piece we'll talk about at the end is if they find the research exciting but they don't think you can do it you're still gonna get really Dean sort of saying it and if you can have some of your references right up front and that it's almost throwing in some of the background of your work in there that's really gonna help so here it is certain teachers never it's not a rationale for doing it but there have some kind of theoretical rationale that meanings indicate why it might work differently or needs adaptation in this population in therefore means-tested so we're going to talk about innovation now and this people often find is the hardest section to write I find it's also really critical because if people I've had mentees come back that have had lower scores on innovation and when they come back those scores it's often because they didn't sell it enough so this is kind of your cell baby cell piece right because you've got to be able to make us on the airplane go I'm I'm gonna I'm gonna vote for you in the section so it has to feel like again hopefully you're using some kind of novel theory these are just kind of if you're using cultural grounding and to explain why and you're doing there's some kind of cutting edge novel design please put that in and use those kinds of words innovative cutting edge you know if you're doing multiple modes of evaluation or it's qualitative and quantitative if you're advancing processes that's really important you're taking some kind of broader strokes approach and then for the particular grants that we working with if you're blending what Western and indigenous work that's really helpful in terms of what that's going to catch different just using some kind of a piece of technology it's often not sufficient so you can put that in but it may not be in and it's a example this is an example from my current my ro1 and these were my six key innovations that I put in I had them in a box so I discussed them briefly in a paragraph but I had them in the box so all they had to do was look at the box and move on and that was a really important don't I've seen innovative sections that are a whole page long and it just gets buried you just can't even see it so again you can see it's a multi-component directed at both child and caregiver it focuses on their family this is a theoretical piece on the nucleus about behavior change there's another method reinforced toolkit social networking so that's another methods piece but that's it was my social networking control was designed by the community and there's diversity so I got the CBPR pieces in I got some innovative methodology in I got the focus where we're going and then I turn over the best dummies gonna approach hi everybody I'm Beth rink with community health in the Department of Health and Human Development at miss you I'm going to talk about the approach section so you want to approach section highlights off why your team is the most fabulous team in the world to do this study so it helps to start out your approach section with your partner CBP CBP our partnership and who everybody is on the team and maybe two or three sentences for the P I or Co P is or maybe some of the co-investigators and maybe just one sentence for whoever else is on your research team but in the richness that I write I always talk about that our team is interdisciplinary that we use Western science and indigenous knowledge that we're focused on communities and what tribes or regions were focused on as well as being an academic institution so I like to blend the difference sets of the members of the research team in in that first pair it's usually a paragraph of the approach section then having a description of the communities that you're working in and I'll show you a map we used in our r1 and in a little bit have a conceptual framework or theoretical model that includes the variables that you're looking at so that whoever is reading it can quickly look and say oh okay this is the concepts they're working with this is the theoretical background and it also I mean we tend to sometimes glosso or a theory and think it's not important but it is seminal to a lot of our work and it's important I think highlight to the reviewers that you do know your theory like Alex said you want to be throughout your grant presenting in one way or another that you're the expert and you know your theory your methods your community and I'll show you some examples of the frameworks in a moment also then you can have your section on your preliminary studies that can be anywhere from a half a page to a page when I submitted my ro1 we have completed pilot tests of we are here now but because we have any of the data ready I didn't put that at all in the ro1 so I think it's important for you to think about what preliminary studies you can write about with passion and conviction and and put those in your in your work in your ro1 if you haven't if you're not if your pilot study isn't done or you're not convinced that the results are going to help get you to where you want to go then I would advocate that you think about whether it's include that or not and then it also helps to have a description of your intervention and also show you some examples of that but I wanted to show you this figure that we had that we put in our ro1 about our approach because it highlights the cbpr process it talks about the different our luminara's studies that we did it addresses how the intervention was designed it highlights each of the aims of the studies what our outcomes are going to be and then how we're planning to make them sustainable and this it's just a nice very succinct image of how we got to where we are in the actual content of the our own so here I apologize that this map isn't a very big map but it's kind of fuzzy but this was a map of hates the five sites where we're going to be doing or where we are doing our intervention we are here now and have the sites and then we have the numbers and parentheses of the young people we're going to be in the intervention so that the can start to see oh this is how many youths are in each community that are in the target population that are going to be part of the sample size it also kind of gives people reviewers an idea of where Fort Peck is in relationship to the state of Montana and I want to say that when I did my mock review I did not have a map in my in my proposal and all of my mock reviewers said you need a map you because the reviewers need to see where you're actually gonna be working here's an example of the conceptual framework we used ecological systems theory for our for our study and it on one side it talks about the the factors or the digit that we will measuring and look in our intervention and on the left side talks about the factors that were not looking at so this I think also gives reviewers a good idea to say oh these this is specifically what they're gonna look at this is what they're not looking at it also kind of tells the story that we as the research team know we can't look at everything that there are certain things that look at and then we aren't going to look at and one oh let me go back this is very similar to a framework that you're going to see a little later of Alec here is a table of that intervention that we're doing and we are here now it's a multi-level multi-component intervention and when we were writing the ro1 it was important for us to just be as clear as possible about what each of the different levels were in each of the different components because it very it's a very complicated ro one and so I wanted a image of pictures so that everybody could see a level so on the top here I described what the level is and like logistics of it of the level or of that piece of the intervention like how many times it's going to meet who's gonna do it what it is and where it's gonna happen and then in the bottom here is the actual nuts and bolts of what is going to happen at each level this is an image of the data comments and measures and really don't have a lot of room in your ro ones to write out how everything is going to be measured so a table is a good way to talk about these are the primary outcome variables secondary tertiary whatever your variables are these are the number of times it's going to be measured and these are the items or the cronbach's alpha this is a very brief description of what the measures actually are and then in the text of the ro1 I have I think it's just one very long paragraph that briefly just highlights where all of these different measures come from because if I went into describing every single one of these in the ro1 it would literally probably take up about five pages and you don't have five pages to do that this is an example of Alex's theoretical framework you can see you know the that I did same thing that she did I had um she has on one side the variables that she's hat and then on the other side the variables that she's not looking at here is an example of Alex's old research design she was doing a crossover high so she has here the eligibility or who the population is in eligibility in eligible populations research participants the eligible ones cites a number of people in each site how they were randomized and how the crossover design worked what the content was and then what happened at the end so I didn't have room to do something like this in my one so again I think you have to choose what images and figures you're gonna have if you have a very complicated design like Alex did this is a great way to hide and it also just focuses the eye of the review or odd oh this is exactly what they're gonna do here's an example from ins um you oh one and you will want slightly different than the Naro ones but a lot of the information that is in an ro1 is also similar to what city you go on and what we liked about this image and why we want to ask suzanne they'll share it with you all today is because in her do one she highlights what the requirements are of the of the uo one of the actual proposal and then how her proposal how their project meets those specific requirements and it's one table it's clearly laid out so that everybody knows okay these are the these are the requirements and this is how this particular project project is meeting those requirements here's another from suzanne zuo one around the conceptual framework and how its organized what the community identified and what the community said they wanted to have happen the place that that has in the intervention how it's being measured the result so again just super clear images your analysis is really important and I think Alex and I both will tell everybody that it's important to start working with your biostatistician as you're designing and coming up with the proposal you don't just wait until the end so you want to provide as much detail in your analysis as your analysis plan to your aim so in my one each aim had an its own analysis plan for it you want to have simple clear analysis plan but it also has to be appropriate to what your intervention is so you want to be able to justify your measures justify your statistics justify your research design and why your research design and your methods and your analysis are the most appropriate to answer the questions that you're interested in so we are here now the other one that we have the sections in our RO one was the an overview of the trial design in the timeline we have a sub section on the sample size and how the sample size was calculated and the power that you have to run the analysis that you propose so make sure you include your sample size your power and how that power specifically relates back to your research questions and your measures and what you're trying to answer so there's the power analysis then we have the outcome measure section in which I showed you that table of a little bit before and then the data analysis sub section so here is an example of exactly what is he our RO one so you can see I have one paragraph on the trial design and the timeline so I derive what the design is and then I have the timeline for years one through five it's just super straightforward and here's a picture of our actual trial design that we're using a stepped wedge design or stepped wedge design and then also the timeline for it it's talked about have a feasibility component or one of your aims being a feasibility or some sort of sustainability aim about what you're going to do with these results or how you're going to evaluate the effectiveness of what you actually are doing so we have a whole feasibility component in our ro1 which in retrospect I think is its own study in it of itself now that we're actually trying to do it so in retrospect I would make this simpler than now for future are our ones that we're doing now but you do need some sort of part of your ro1 part of your study that talks about how you're going to evaluate the effectiveness of what you actually did so we did that here with just using a feasibility framework that was developed by age and where we did it to fit the needs of we are and then here's the table from our ro1 about how we're actually going to address the feasibility like what parts of the NIH framework that they developed for feasibility and ability what what they developed what parts we're using and then how we're gonna use it you also don't want to forget dissemination when you were writing our ro1 it was perfect and beautiful and I thought I was all done and then about three weeks before it was due I was reading through it oh my god we don't have it to summon plan like there's nothing there but by this we didn't have an room for a big compliment complicated dissemination plan so I just put in a very short paragraph about what we're gonna do and I because we didn't have a lot of room and again you also want to always be highlighting that you're the expert and you know what you're doing I talked about I really you know every chance I got I reinforced the length of the partnership I talked about what we had already done to demonstrate our success and then what we're gonna do in the future related to this so just very short but clear you also want to have a limitation and I don't like limit like just the term limitations and so I now do a lot of strengths and limitations and the proposals I write as well as in the journal articles so I'm an Alex taught me this about limitations that you want to highlight that you that there is a limitation but even though it's a limitation you really have strengths in the community to solve that limitations so if you read through this limitation we talked about like how recruitment could be an issue and we have registered that recruitment and retention can be an issue and that we know we need to address attrition in our sample size but really the fact that we have this long-standing partner fire moon and I've been working at fort pact for 13 years that that is actually a strength that will overcome this particular limitation so you want to highlight and acknowledge you have a limitation but if there is some sort of strengths that you can leave into that limitation to give the reviewers the confidence that you have the ability to address the limitation and then always want to end with why again what more research is going to contribute feel why and I each needs to fund you and what the big impact is gonna be from your or your trial what new information are you going to be giving to your area of research that that is unique and novel and innovative this is Alex again we're gonna wrap up soon I'm gonna talk through a few of the investigator issues that come up my people will not this is directly from NIH so here it goes um if you have a limited record of research in the area or with a population how are you going to address that so for example I was doing my last ro1 and had a sleek component into trying to understand sleep and I had every other expert I had physical activity experts at night nutrition and so I had all the other bases covered on all the other boxes but all my mock reviewers said you've got to have someone that knows about sleep I'm like oh dear God how many Co eyes can I possibly gab but I did I went I got someone who was a sleep expert that turned out to be that that person was there so again they don't have to do a huge amount they can be a co-investigator or a consultant but they need to be on there so make sure that you're addressing that um make sure that they're on it for six they're on for a good enough they can really contribute to the project so the consultant is only on during year one but really you're not looking at the data till year four and they need to look at it with you make sure that they're at least coming back on board I had a sociologist like that on my on my grant she was doing a lot of high-level mathematical well he was consulting in the beginning of the grant and then at the end of the ground and so we stuck him in the budget in your wine at your five and justified that so that's just kind of an important piece to understand um and then the other piece that NIH doesn't understand we were just talking about the urban the urban bias that going to find NIH is it nothing exists outside of the East Coast and potentially only DC um if you're doing really rural work like a lot of us do and the sites are really distant or you have to help them understand what like it means the first time we took nih up to Blackfeet which is a lot less far than Fort Peck you know they're just like oh my god you know they just don't have a concept if they drive five hours if they're getting into like four different states anyway really think about what's the detail and my ro1 was in for sorry in five different Native communities we were in five states we had three time zones and we had a really detailed plan both in our resource environment as well as in the grant about how the court in at the University of Wisconsin was into each of its on a regular basis and that turned out to work really well that plan because she Skyped with them once a week at every site but that's an important piece to put on there cuz LR as people are going to be confused about how that works and then Beth is going to jump back in one of the biggest problems with NIH clinical trials is recruitment and retention they are always always always especially minority communities and certain that you're not going to be able to recruit those folks and retain those folks if you have any record recruited and retained folks in the past make sure you highlight that make sure you're really clear about how the community is going to help you do that work make sure that your history with that community however long it is is obvious so that you can figure out how that's going to help and make sure that whatever the recruitment and enrollment plan is that it's been a result of the needed sample SAP compensating for some kind of attrition an attrition rate similar studies or you can kind of make up when I needed 80% you know I you know people just sort of stay in justify why you're only including you know native participants or are they going to be mixed or they can be male and female or they can it be whether the age group is going to be and then why those are really critical you're going to get this this can really hurt you and this is where you can sneak in information in your support so your communities can say we are so excited about this study that we're really going to help you get this population on board and retain them for you and I think that's those LSE's that's a letter support can really help with that piece turned over you to human subjects and let's go back to that and then so I wanted to just briefly to talk about human subjects we don't for the few things that I think are important that was certainly good teachings for me around human subjects and your 9h application is not until the last minute to do human subjects because they're pretty much all appendices and sometimes I think again I can only speak from my experience but I was so excited about the research design and the methods and the letters of support and sort of that that whole mobilization that happens with your community partners around putting in an ro1 that I totally did not pay enough attention to all the appendices related to human subjects so I highly encourage you all to start your human subjects filling out all the human subjects forms alongside or putting together your actual research plan things that I think are super important to the human subjects is get your IRB approval for your application and even like in my area here at MSU I can get IRB approval just to build capacity to start just actually start the research so even though things might change once you get funding and you have to you know finalize your research instruments or whatever it is work with your IRB at your institutions to get approval to to actually start the study and then you can include that in your application you can have one or two sentences in your actual ro1 that says whew or wherever your food is has given IRB approval and then you can attach in the appendices so make sure that you say in your application is the same as what you say in your inclusion criteria and in all of the human subjects establishments so you have you have to do attachments on inclusion of women and children you have to do a general human subjects inclusion attachment you have to do enrollment form attachments like all of those attachments make sure that everything matches like you have to be match II and this is where if you're a compulsive if you're a compulsive matcher person that likes things everything neat and tidy that's where you all of that can come out okay if you're not that person then you like I'm not I had to find somebody that could help me make everything match and that just gets back to what Alex says about you build your research team to fill in the gaps where you're not the expert so that as a team you have all the expertise the other piece of the human subjects that is important for ro1s is you need to have a data safety monitoring plan and that that is required in your application so make sure that you have and have put together your data safety monitoring plan they also require a data safety monitoring committee now you don't necessarily need to say that you have those committee members yet for your application but I the more organized you are and the more you can tell NIH I am ready to go give me the money and I'm going to hit the ground running with this the better so we had our data safety monitoring committee people all named we had letters of support from all of them and that also is important for your human subjects and the other piece I want to say about human subjects is once awarded you will receive money until all of your human subjects is in a row until it's all organ so all them reason to get it organized during the application because when we got noticed that we were getting funded from the time we got notice to the time the money actually came it was like a month you know that's not a lot of time to get people galvanized so the more you can be organized with all of your human subjects attachments the better and they the reviewers do look at them like where I got dinged in rro funded was in the human subjects attachment those were all attachments those weren't the actual application obviously this is a picture students of two little girls eating apples our path that's what I do is promote wellness communities so that was awesome but obviously why we do what we do is we love to work with our communities we want we're passionate about improving their health and so now we're gonna do a Q&A so Sue's got some you have their questions from folks go ahead and then I'm gonna go to the chit and then tell us how they are okay perfect and what do you want to see them out loud again name says this mic can pick up every word but we're not quite sure all right great I think it's just for ro1 I don't know if it does for our twenty ones but the r21 is a tricky mechanism so I would suggest not looking at that mechanism until you really strongly get a program officer on board interested in your work people tend to view them as a stepping stone to the ro1 they should really be viewed as a stepping stone if you intervention that you're ready to do then you need to ro1 when we did our bridging the gap conference the NIH people were really down on it that mechanism for any kind of small pilot interventions or things like their like this is for mechanistic kind of things it's very different very different piece and in fact they didn't fund a single r21 through that RFP that we were there helping people to submit to and they said all the ones that had submitted that have submitted to ARA wants or shouldn't have submitted at all it was kind of a year for so be careful with that mechanism and talk to your program officers so what they were telling any different path they were saying about sort of mechanistic sort of stuff or like theoretical sorts of pieces or if you have an idea that you wanna test it's not it's not an inner vent it's more like idea right are there reputable resources for additional information webinars seminars online or in-person books etc so um so look so NIH always but there are various different training um things I think MSU has got a number of different kinds of training mechanisms new faculty development faculty excellence excellence Center so that's a place to look and we will be holding another one of these kind of NIH seminars next summer so look for that some of it will hopefully be open and others if it will be application only so be kind of an open closed session in June I also want to say in response to that question about additional resources or materials I always go back to the seminal works in my field and reference those in my ro1 so like I will go back to the book that Nina Wallerstein and Barbara Israel wrote on cbpr that's now like in a fourth edition reference that and use it from from that seminal work I do the same thing with John Cresswell's book on mixed methods or any of the there's a seminal work on health behavior models and theories in public health so I always like to ground my work in the history of the field and a lot of that just because I'm old now was it works so so there there might be newer gergovia resources on those areas but I I just always go to the seminal the seminal works that's the book that we can add to the we're putting references and we can add to everybody okay yeah and then there's AI ths has a lot of resources so Institute for translational Sciences at University of Washington has good resources and the other organization is Norman nrmn national research mentoring Network thank you and they often these calls for things in fact they've got a interesting call right now for people who are writing an ro1 and it's basically big part of a research study and so your randomized to different kinds of help for your ro1 if you want to be in that coming out of the University of Utah thought that was particularly interesting and someone wrote an ro1 about writing our own that was like so there's a question is is it a must to have a publication in the area you are proposing to do your research before you submit an ro1 and I would say absolutely yes I like I said when I was not speaking we had done a pilot intervention up here now while we were writing the ro1 that we didn't have the results for so I didn't obviously include that in the preliminary studies and we're just now submitting a publication about that but how I got around that was talking about all the research we've done up at Fort pack that have led up to the design of this ro1 and why all the research we've done leading up to this ro1 is supported by the design that we have and I also because I do research Greenland I included in my preliminary studies that work as well even though it wasn't specific to Fort pack and that particular population there were components of it that were so you absolutely I would say needs publications in that area right and I think that's true for any NIH grant yeah like when you're writing a ke grant or any of them you've got have pubs that show that you've got expertise and so that I think is really tricky you don't take we haven't heard a lot about budgets so I you know I think it's important just as a general rule that you as the main writer of the ro1 understand your process as a writer so for me even though the budget people that I was working with her and still do work with like they wanted to know everything up front I couldn't quite give them anything specific until I had actually sat down to conceptualize the research plan and what we were actually gonna do I can say that the budget process for me is very and there's a lot of back-and-forth between me the community partners I'm working with and then the people that are actually doing the budget and I think it's important to start your budget process when you actually start writing the grant like you can get ideas about how much people's time is gonna cost and how much your travel is gonna cost and I would start doing that as soon as you've decided that yes this is the ARRA one we're gonna write and this is the deadline I'm you also have to keep in mind that you have the people you're working with on your budget but the some times are different than your office of sponsored programs or your grant management division at your institution so as you know that you're gonna write an ro1 in addition to enlisting all the budget people that you work with directly in your department or your college also enlist the help and the support of the people in your grants management office so that they know what what is on the way yeah and there that can be really helpful at least I think we Furr to mention is what really I think is the most useful thing that I found was writing my first ro1 was to find lots of examples of other RO ones and look at those examples and go oh that's how they did it or they use that kind of picture which is why we showed you a lot of pictures of how they did things look at those other people's budgets that are doing the similar sorts of research and that that will help you get an idea of what that takes to do that and then work with your mentors to figure out you know where you're gonna get kinds of support who's going to help you with outlining that budget and writing those you know budget justification pages you know where are you gonna find out how much that consultant that's a University of Miami's gonna cost you you know you don't want to be spending your time doing that who can for you that kind of thing so those are that's hence start starting early enough that you're not scrambling around at the end our going oh I don't have XYZ and I'm going to have to postpone yes we have students with their questions from well I really want to thank our speakers we do have 10 more minutes if there's any final questions either put it on the chat or you can ask in the room and we'll repeat your question and seeing none I thank our speakers very much as I've gotten so many chats saying how useful this was so thanks so much coming up now on the screen thank you for attending and and please come to our next quarter series of this and that one is December 11th and that has to do with financial management of NIH funded researchers so getting back on this which is really helpful because Maya is going to talk a lot about subcontracting with communities and writing a budget justifications it sounds really boring but it's really important be really critical because I have seen grants failed because they did not do a good enough job of explaining how they were going to share money with community partners and you can have the most beautiful science you want but if you're if you're IRB and your human subjects isn't tight and they don't like that or your budget doesn't match what you say you're gonna do it they don't think it's feasible you're tanked it doesn't matter what you're saying looks like so just that's my final come here Maya and talk about that in the Senate great thanks everybody and we'll see you next time take care bye all right.