Understanding the NIH review process: A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology

G. Audesirk, T. Burbacher, T. R. Guilarte, N. K. Laughlin, Richard M. LoPachin, J. Suszkiw, H. Tilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

During the past two years, the National Institutes of Health have made significant changes in the review process for investigator-initiated research grant applications in neurotoxicology. First, study sections that formerly dealt with toxicology and alcohol, respectively, have been merged. Neurotoxicology grant applications are now reviewed by ALTX-3, a study section in which the majority of members have expertise in the neuronal, biochemical or behavioral effects of alcohol, but usually not other neurotoxicants. Second, the NIH has instituted new review criteria, in which significance, approach, innovation, investigator expertise, and research environment must all be explicitly addressed by the reviews. In this article, past and present members of the ALTX-3 study section describe the NIH review process, with emphasis on how neurotoxicology applications are handled, and provide guidelines for preparing competitive applications. Following is an outline of this brief guide: I. Introduction; II. The ALTX. 3 Study Section; A. Study Section Expertise; B. Study Section Workload; III. New Review Criteria; IV. Features of Successful Grant Applications; A. Background and Specific Aims; B. Preliminary Data and/or Progress Report; C. Experimental Design; D. Revised Applications; E. Updating your Application (Sending Post- Submission Material); V. Summary; VI. Acknowledgments; VII. References.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)91-98
Number of pages8
JournalNeuroToxicology
Volume20
Issue number1
StatePublished - 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Organized Financing
Alcohols
Research Personnel
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Workload
Research
Toxicology
Research Design
Guidelines
Design of experiments
Innovation
Health

Keywords

  • Grant Proposals
  • Grant Reviews
  • Guide to Writing
  • Neurotoxicology
  • NIH Review Process

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
  • Neuroscience(all)
  • Toxicology

Cite this

Audesirk, G., Burbacher, T., Guilarte, T. R., Laughlin, N. K., LoPachin, R. M., Suszkiw, J., & Tilson, H. (1999). Understanding the NIH review process: A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology. NeuroToxicology, 20(1), 91-98.

Understanding the NIH review process : A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology. / Audesirk, G.; Burbacher, T.; Guilarte, T. R.; Laughlin, N. K.; LoPachin, Richard M.; Suszkiw, J.; Tilson, H.

In: NeuroToxicology, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1999, p. 91-98.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Audesirk, G, Burbacher, T, Guilarte, TR, Laughlin, NK, LoPachin, RM, Suszkiw, J & Tilson, H 1999, 'Understanding the NIH review process: A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology', NeuroToxicology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 91-98.
Audesirk G, Burbacher T, Guilarte TR, Laughlin NK, LoPachin RM, Suszkiw J et al. Understanding the NIH review process: A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology. NeuroToxicology. 1999;20(1):91-98.
Audesirk, G. ; Burbacher, T. ; Guilarte, T. R. ; Laughlin, N. K. ; LoPachin, Richard M. ; Suszkiw, J. ; Tilson, H. / Understanding the NIH review process : A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology. In: NeuroToxicology. 1999 ; Vol. 20, No. 1. pp. 91-98.
@article{6c4cd18598dd4043b49c8d1e6d221e75,
title = "Understanding the NIH review process: A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology",
abstract = "During the past two years, the National Institutes of Health have made significant changes in the review process for investigator-initiated research grant applications in neurotoxicology. First, study sections that formerly dealt with toxicology and alcohol, respectively, have been merged. Neurotoxicology grant applications are now reviewed by ALTX-3, a study section in which the majority of members have expertise in the neuronal, biochemical or behavioral effects of alcohol, but usually not other neurotoxicants. Second, the NIH has instituted new review criteria, in which significance, approach, innovation, investigator expertise, and research environment must all be explicitly addressed by the reviews. In this article, past and present members of the ALTX-3 study section describe the NIH review process, with emphasis on how neurotoxicology applications are handled, and provide guidelines for preparing competitive applications. Following is an outline of this brief guide: I. Introduction; II. The ALTX. 3 Study Section; A. Study Section Expertise; B. Study Section Workload; III. New Review Criteria; IV. Features of Successful Grant Applications; A. Background and Specific Aims; B. Preliminary Data and/or Progress Report; C. Experimental Design; D. Revised Applications; E. Updating your Application (Sending Post- Submission Material); V. Summary; VI. Acknowledgments; VII. References.",
keywords = "Grant Proposals, Grant Reviews, Guide to Writing, Neurotoxicology, NIH Review Process",
author = "G. Audesirk and T. Burbacher and Guilarte, {T. R.} and Laughlin, {N. K.} and LoPachin, {Richard M.} and J. Suszkiw and H. Tilson",
year = "1999",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "91--98",
journal = "NeuroToxicology",
issn = "0161-813X",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding the NIH review process

T2 - A brief guide to writing grant proposals in neurotoxicology

AU - Audesirk, G.

AU - Burbacher, T.

AU - Guilarte, T. R.

AU - Laughlin, N. K.

AU - LoPachin, Richard M.

AU - Suszkiw, J.

AU - Tilson, H.

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - During the past two years, the National Institutes of Health have made significant changes in the review process for investigator-initiated research grant applications in neurotoxicology. First, study sections that formerly dealt with toxicology and alcohol, respectively, have been merged. Neurotoxicology grant applications are now reviewed by ALTX-3, a study section in which the majority of members have expertise in the neuronal, biochemical or behavioral effects of alcohol, but usually not other neurotoxicants. Second, the NIH has instituted new review criteria, in which significance, approach, innovation, investigator expertise, and research environment must all be explicitly addressed by the reviews. In this article, past and present members of the ALTX-3 study section describe the NIH review process, with emphasis on how neurotoxicology applications are handled, and provide guidelines for preparing competitive applications. Following is an outline of this brief guide: I. Introduction; II. The ALTX. 3 Study Section; A. Study Section Expertise; B. Study Section Workload; III. New Review Criteria; IV. Features of Successful Grant Applications; A. Background and Specific Aims; B. Preliminary Data and/or Progress Report; C. Experimental Design; D. Revised Applications; E. Updating your Application (Sending Post- Submission Material); V. Summary; VI. Acknowledgments; VII. References.

AB - During the past two years, the National Institutes of Health have made significant changes in the review process for investigator-initiated research grant applications in neurotoxicology. First, study sections that formerly dealt with toxicology and alcohol, respectively, have been merged. Neurotoxicology grant applications are now reviewed by ALTX-3, a study section in which the majority of members have expertise in the neuronal, biochemical or behavioral effects of alcohol, but usually not other neurotoxicants. Second, the NIH has instituted new review criteria, in which significance, approach, innovation, investigator expertise, and research environment must all be explicitly addressed by the reviews. In this article, past and present members of the ALTX-3 study section describe the NIH review process, with emphasis on how neurotoxicology applications are handled, and provide guidelines for preparing competitive applications. Following is an outline of this brief guide: I. Introduction; II. The ALTX. 3 Study Section; A. Study Section Expertise; B. Study Section Workload; III. New Review Criteria; IV. Features of Successful Grant Applications; A. Background and Specific Aims; B. Preliminary Data and/or Progress Report; C. Experimental Design; D. Revised Applications; E. Updating your Application (Sending Post- Submission Material); V. Summary; VI. Acknowledgments; VII. References.

KW - Grant Proposals

KW - Grant Reviews

KW - Guide to Writing

KW - Neurotoxicology

KW - NIH Review Process

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032972534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032972534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10091862

AN - SCOPUS:0032972534

VL - 20

SP - 91

EP - 98

JO - NeuroToxicology

JF - NeuroToxicology

SN - 0161-813X

IS - 1

ER -