How to Trip Rapid Review

Step 1: Select articles relevant to your search (remember the system is only optimised for single intervention studies)

Step 2: press

Step 3: review the result, and maybe amend the or if you know better! If we're unsure of the overall sentiment of the trial we will display the conclusion under the article title. We then require you to tell us what the correct sentiment is.

18,184 results for

"grant funding" or "obtaining grants" or "getting grants" or "grant awards" or (grants and "how to")

by
...
Alerts

Export results

Use check boxes to select individual results below

SmartSearch available

Trip's SmartSearch engine has discovered connected searches & results. Click to show

21. Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

understanding of whether or how bibliometric indexes should be used requires further clarification. For instance, perhaps a specific range of years or narrowing types of publications (ie, excluding reviews) would lead to better value for bibliometric indexes. Li and Agha found that better peer review scores correlate with better research outcomes. They analyzed publication and patenting outcomes of >130 000 R01 grants funded by the NIH and concluded that the system works. They determined that percentile (...) aspects of the grant review process. The 11-minute video covered the importance of the review process, how scores influence funding decisions, the meaning of each value on the rating scale, how to assign scores, and why it is important to understand the funding criteria of the specific agency. Novice and experienced reviewers were randomly assigned to view the video or to visit a website with information on the grant program and funding criteria. They then assigned ratings to specific examples

2017 American Heart Association

22. Advisory on Granting Privileges for Deep Sedation to Non-Anesthesiologist Physicians

Advisory on Granting Privileges for Deep Sedation to Non-Anesthesiologist Physicians 1 Advisory on Granting Privileges for Deep Sedation to Non-Anesthesiologist Physicians Committee of Origin: Quality Management and Departmental Administration (Approved by the ASA House of Delegates on October 20, 2010 and last amended on October 25, 2017) 1. INTRODUCTION The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) is committed to improving patient safety and quality of care in the administration of all (...) for physicians who are not anesthesia physicians to administer sedative and analgesic drugs to establish a level of deep sedation. They are written to apply to every setting in which an internal or external privileging process is required for granting privileges to administer sedative and analgesic drugs to establish a level of deep sedation (e.g., hospital, freestanding procedure center, ambulatory surgery center, physician’s or dentist’s office, etc.). These recommendations do not lead to the granting

2017 American Society of Anesthesiologists

23. An Agenda for Increasing Grant Funding of Emergency Medicine Education Research. (Full text)

An Agenda for Increasing Grant Funding of Emergency Medicine Education Research. Funding is a perennial challenge for medical education researchers. Through a consensus process, the authors developed a multifaceted agenda for increasing funding of education research in emergency medicine (EM). Priority agenda items include developing resources to increase the competitiveness of medical education research faculty in grant applications, identifying means by which departments may bolster (...) their faculty's grant writing success, taking long-term steps to increase the number of grants available to education researchers in the field, and encouraging a shift in cultural attitudes toward education research.© 2012 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

2012 Academic Emergency Medicine PubMed

24. Effects of seniority, gender and geography on the bibliometric output and collaboration networks of European Research Council (ERC) grant recipients. (Full text)

, and the collaboration networks of European Research Council (ERC) starting (junior) and advanced (senior) grantees. For this study, we used a cohort of 355 grantees from the Life Sciences domain of years 2007-09. While senior grantees had overall greater publication output, junior grantees had a significantly greater pre-post grant award increase in their overall number of publications and in those on which they had last authorship. The collaboration networks size and the number of sub-communities increased for all (...) grantees, although more pronounced for juniors, as they departed from smaller and more compact pre-award co-authorship networks. Both junior and senior grantees increased the size of the community within which they were collaborating in the post-award period. Pre-post grant award performance of grantees was not related to gender, although male junior grantees had more publications than female grantees before and after the grant award. Junior grantees located in lower research-performing countries

2019 PLoS ONE PubMed

25. Outcomes of Mentored, Grant-Funded Fellowship Training in Hemostasis/Thrombosis: Findings from a Nested Case-Control Survey Study (Full text)

Outcomes of Mentored, Grant-Funded Fellowship Training in Hemostasis/Thrombosis: Findings from a Nested Case-Control Survey Study Successful strategies by which to effectively recruit and retain academic subspecialists in benign haematology have not been established. To evaluate the effectiveness of a grant-funded, mentored fellowship with respect to retention and early career goals in haemostasis/thrombosis, we sought to compare outcomes for graduates of a grant-funded, mentored fellowship (...) (range) percent time spent in benign haematology postfellowship was 98% (70-100%) for cases vs. 0% (0-20%) for controls. Time spent in research was significantly greater among cases than controls (median 80% [range: 42-90%] vs. 55% [10-80%], respectively; P = 0.01). By years 3-4 postfellowship, median annual number of peer-reviewed publications was higher for cases than controls (3.5 vs. 1.0; P = 0.01). Cases were also more successful in grant funding (including K-awards). These data suggest

2011 Haemophilia PubMed

26. The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity (Full text)

The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity In this paper, we estimate the impact of receiving an NIH grant on subsequent publications and citations. Our sample consists of all applications (unsuccessful as well as successful) to the NIH from 1980 to 2000 for standard research grants (R01s). Both OLS and IV estimates show that receipt of an NIH research grant (worth roughly $1.7 million) leads to only one additional publication over the next five years, which corresponds (...) to a 7 percent increase. The limited impact of NIH grants is consistent with a model in which the market for research funding is competitive, so that the loss of an NIH grant simply causes researchers to shift to another source of funding.

2011 Journal of Public Economics PubMed

27. Early career academic productivity among emergency physicians with r01 grant funding. (Full text)

Early career academic productivity among emergency physicians with r01 grant funding. The objective was to describe the early academic career activities of emergency physician (EP) scientists with recent Research Project Grant Program (R01) grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).The curricula vitae of all EP scientists in the United States currently funded by the NIH were analyzed for evidence of advanced research training and frequency and type of publication and grant (...) writing. Each investigator was surveyed for demographic features and estimation of protected time during their early career development.Eighteen investigators were identified. The median length of time from completion of residency to receipt of their first R01 grant was 11 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 11 to 15 years), and the median age of investigators at the time of this award was 43 years (IQR = 39 to 47 years). At the time of their award, researchers were publishing five peer-reviewed

2011 Academic Emergency Medicine PubMed

28. Journal Clubs: 2. Why and how to run them and how to publish them (Full text)

Journal Clubs: 2. Why and how to run them and how to publish them Journal Clubs: 2. Why and how to run them and how to publish them | BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine We use cookies to improve our service and to tailor our content and advertising to you. You can manage your cookie settings via your browser at any time. To learn more about how we use cookies, please see our . Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your (...) user name or password? Search for this keyword Search for this keyword Main menu Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? You are here Journal Clubs: 2. Why and how to run them and how to publish them Article Text Journal club Journal Clubs: 2. Why and how to run them and how to publish them Free Jeffrey K Aronson Statistics from Altmetric.com Journal clubs have many functions, including

2017 Evidence-Based Medicine (Requires free registration) PubMed

29. Grant Funds and the Medical Library (Full text)

Grant Funds and the Medical Library 13536627 2000 07 01 2018 12 01 0025-7338 46 2 1958 Apr Bulletin of the Medical Library Association Bull Med Libr Assoc Grant funds and the medical library. 185-7 POSTELL W D WD eng Journal Article United States Bull Med Libr Assoc 0421037 0025-7338 OM Financial Management Financing, Organized Humans Libraries Libraries, Medical 5834:29163:341 LIBRARIES, MEDICAL 1958 4 1 1958 4 1 0 1 1958 4 1 0 0 ppublish 13536627 PMC200250

1958 Bulletin of the Medical Library Association PubMed

30. The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing

like they wouldn’t get funded in other ways. The money contributed is a gift and not an investment or loan and we won’t own any of the intellectual property. The only request is that you think about how to pay this forward to other. The fund has made grants to two exciting projects so far. Lucas Saldyt will be building an open source prototype of a . Aleks Kissinger and John van de Wetering are developing , an open optimizing compiler for quantum programs whose techniques are inspired (...) The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing | PLOS Blogs Network PLOS Blogs Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific Policy Diverse perspectives on science and medicine Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental

2018 PLOS Blogs Network

31. The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing

like they wouldn’t get funded in other ways. The money contributed is a gift and not an investment or loan and we won’t own any of the intellectual property. The only request is that you think about how to pay this forward to other. The fund has made grants to two exciting projects so far. Lucas Saldyt will be building an open source prototype of a . Aleks Kissinger and John van de Wetering are developing , an open optimizing compiler for quantum programs whose techniques are inspired (...) The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing The Unitary Fund: a no-strings attached grant program for Open Source quantum computing | PLOS Blogs Network PLOS Blogs Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific Policy Diverse perspectives on science and medicine Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental

2018 PLOS Blogs Network

32. Introducing GRANTOMICS: Our enhanced search engine and analysis tool for grant information associated with publications on genomics and population health impact.

through GRANTOMICS enables potential grant applicants or funding agencies to identify gaps in knowledge for genomic translational research, and enables researchers to identify potential collaborators. Using “breast cancer” as a free text search example, we illustrate resulting summary data, ( ) and graphs by year and topic area. ( and ). We are eager to get input and feedback on how to continue to improve GRANTOMICS and PHGKB in general. Our contact email: Figure 1. Statistics on “Breast Cancer (...) Introducing GRANTOMICS: Our enhanced search engine and analysis tool for grant information associated with publications on genomics and population health impact. Introducing GRANTOMICS: Our enhanced search engine and analysis tool for grant information associated with publications on genomics and population health impact. | | Blogs | CDC Search Form Controls TOPIC ONLY Search The CDC cancel submit Search Form Controls TOPIC ONLY Search The CDC cancel submit Note: Javascript is disabled

2018 CDC Genomics and Health Impact Blog

33. A cross-sectional study of predatory publishing emails received by career development grant awardees. (PubMed)

A cross-sectional study of predatory publishing emails received by career development grant awardees. To investigate the scope of academic spam emails (ASEs) among career development grant awardees and the factors associated with the amount of time spent addressing them.A cross-sectional survey of career development grant investigators via an anonymous online survey was conducted. In addition to demographic and professional information, we asked investigators to report the number of ASEs (...) received each day, how they determined whether these emails were spam and time they spent per day addressing them. We used bivariate analysis to assess factors associated with the amount of time spent on ASEs.An online survey sent via email on three separate occasions between November and December 2016.All National Institutes of Health career development awardees funded in the 2015 fiscal year.Factors associated with the amount of time spent addressing ASEs.A total of 3492 surveys were emailed

2019 BMJ open

34. Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity. (Full text)

, reflecting other key themes (described in detail in the manuscript) that affected program implementation and evaluation, including collaboration, limited time and measurement integration.The EA process provided pilot data that suggest that other state, regional, and national funders should provide centralized assistance for data collection and evaluation from the outset of a mini-grant award program. (...) Evaluability assessment of "growing healthy communities," a mini-grant program to improve access to healthy foods and places for physical activity. Mini-grants have been used to stimulate multisector collaboration in support of public health initiatives by funding non-traditional partners, such as economic development organizations. Such mini-grants have the potential to increase access to healthy foods and places for physical activity through built environment change, especially in small

2019 BMC Public Health PubMed

35. A Public Health of Consequence: Shifting the Cultural Narrative From Churning Grants to a Scholarship of Consequence. (PubMed)

A Public Health of Consequence: Shifting the Cultural Narrative From Churning Grants to a Scholarship of Consequence. A confluence of challenges is impeding faculty members' ability to prioritize research with the goal of achieving a public health of consequence: research designed to improve conditions to produce a healthier society. Together, these challenges create a "churn" culture in which faculty focus on generating new business (i.e., grant funding and associated incentives) to replace (...) lost revenue (i.e., expiring grants); this culture can relegate public health impact to a back seat.We share three strategies and related insights from our efforts to shift our department's cultural narrative from churn to a "scholarship of consequence": crafting research proposals of consequence, fostering thought leadership through collaborative writing, and mentoring faculty with a view to a scholarship of consequence.We describe each of the strategies and interim progress. Although

2019 American Journal of Public Health

36. Getting grants for research in general practice. (Full text)

Getting grants for research in general practice. 1223269 1976 07 06 2018 11 13 0035-8797 25 160 1975 Nov The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners J R Coll Gen Pract Getting grants for research in general practice. 793-8 eng Journal Article England J R Coll Gen Pract 7503107 0035-8797 IM Charities Family Practice Financing, Government Humans Research Support as Topic United Kingdom 1975 11 1 1975 11 1 0 1 1975 11 1 0 0 ppublish 1223269 PMC2157793 Lancet. 1975 Sep 20;2(7934):545

1975 The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners PubMed

37. 2017 brings new grant, new followers, new goals for HealthNewsReview.org

2017 brings new grant, new followers, new goals for HealthNewsReview.org 2017 brings new grant, new followers, new goals for HealthNewsReview.org - HealthNewsReview.org Note to our followers: Our nearly 13-year run of daily publication of new content on HealthNewsReview.org came to a close at the end of 2018. Publisher Gary Schwitzer and other contributors may post new articles periodically. But all of the 6,000+ articles we have published contain lessons to help you improve your critical (...) thinking about health care interventions. And those will be still be alive on the site for a couple of years. 6093 Posts Menu January 5, 2017 2017 brings new grant, new followers, new goals for HealthNewsReview.org Posted By Categories Tags Gary Schwitzer is in his 11th year as publisher of HealthNewsReview.org. He tweets as and/or by using our project handle . We begin 2017 with a new two-year grant from , whose support saved this project after a perilous period without funding in 2013-14

2017 HealthNewsReview

38. Good Enough? Editors, Statistics & Grant Peer Review: PRC8 Day 2

currently is 18%. (There was some talk of migrating to Switzerland!) Grant applicants unhappy with their scores apparently often appeal/complain about their scores: I would be really interested to know the gender breakdown of the appeals. Nakamura spoke about how the NIH uses to distribute about US$25 billion a year. They moved from a 40-point scale to 9-point one in 2009. They’ve looked at ranking, and at allowing a half a point to be added or subtracted after discussion. You can see how these 2 (...) Good Enough? Editors, Statistics & Grant Peer Review: PRC8 Day 2 Good Enough? Editors, Statistics & Grant Peer Review | Absolutely Maybe PLOS Blogs Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research Analysis & Scientific Policy Diverse perspectives on science and medicine Staff Blogs Blogs by Topic Biology & Life Sciences Earth & Environmental Sciences Multi-disciplinary Sciences Medicine & Health Research

2017 Absolutely Maybe

39. Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review. (Full text)

to the committee members for evaluation. The proportion of successful applications led by women did not change with gender-blinding, although the number of successful applications that were led by men increased slightly.There is limited research on interventions to mitigate gender bias in the peer review of grants. Only one study was identified and no difference in the proportion of women who were successful in receiving grant funding was observed. Our results suggest that interventions to prevent gender bias (...) Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review. To review the literature on strategies implemented or identified to prevent or reduce gender bias in peer review of research grants.Studies of any type of qualitative or quantitative design examining interventions to reduce or prevent gender bias during the peer review of health-related research grants were included. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Education Resources

2017 PLoS ONE PubMed

40. Evaluating public involvement in research design and grant development: Using a qualitative document analysis method to analyse an award scheme for researchers (Full text)

provide evidence of the value of public involvement during the development of applications for research funding. The results also indicate that researchers recognise the variety in potential roles for the public in research, and acknowledge how involvement adds value to studies.Background A regional Research Design Service, funded by the National Institute for Health Research, introduced a small grant in 2008, to support public involvement (often known as patient and public involvement [PPI (...) ]) activities during the development of applications for research funding. Successful applicants are requested to submit a report detailing how the grant money was used, including a description of the aims and outcomes of the public involvement activities. The purpose of this study was to analyse the content of these reports. We aimed to find out what researcher views and experiences of public involvement activities were, and what lessons might be learned. Methods We used an innovative method of data

2016 Research involvement and engagement PubMed

To help you find the content you need quickly, you can filter your results via the categories on the right-hand side >>>>