http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-11-203.html
interesting mechanism that seems to involve NIH, DOE, NSF, &c
Posts Tagged ‘funding’
PAR-11-203: Predictive Multiscale Models for Biomedical, Biological, Behavioral, Environmental and Clinical Research (Interagency U01)
July 27, 2013breakthrough prize winners
March 1, 2013http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/20/breakthrough-prize-silicon-valley-entrepreneurs Lander, Botstein, Vogelstein and Cornelia Bargmann…Lewis Cantley, "I almost fell over. I didn’t even know this prize existed." He turned 64 on Wednesday.
Project Seeks to Build Map of Human Brain – NYTimes.com
February 18, 2013Scientific publishing: Brought to book | The Economist
November 3, 20122010 Academic R&D Spending Trends | C&EN
October 29, 2012Comparatively low spending on chemistry at Yale
http://cen.acs.org/articles/90/i43/2010-Academic-RD-Spending-Trends.html http://cen.acs.org/content/dam/cen/90/43/09043-scitech1.pdf
Presidents commision on bioethics releases report on genomics and privacy
October 20, 2012cites Greenbaum et al. PLOS CB (’11)!
3 options for handling preliminary results in New NIH format (Significance, Innovation, Approach)
October 14, 2012http://www.bridgew.edu/sponproj/SigInnovApproachSections.pdf
http://www2.astate.edu/a/research-transfer/Docs/TipsonWritingaCompetitiveNIHGrantProposal.pdf
Option 1, pending any clarification
* Significance
* Innovation
* Approach
– Preliminary Studies supporting Aims
– Aim 1
– Aim 2
– Aim 3
Option 2
* Aim 1
– Significance, Innovation, Approach
* Aim 2
– Significance, Innovation, Approach
* Aim 3
– Significance, Innovation, Approach
* Preliminary Studies/Progress Report
Option 3
* Aim 1: Preliminary studies, Significance, Innovation,
Approach
* Aim 2: Preliminary studies, Significance, Innovation,
Approach
* Aim 3: Preliminary studies, Significance, Innovation,
Approach
12 pages for Sig. + Innov. + Approach
1 pages for Spec. Aims
authorship issues
October 12, 2012http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7417-591a
Particularly relevant to genomics and refers to authorship on the main ENCODE paper
QT:”
Biagioli agrees that delineating each person’s contribution should help, but he says that the descriptions are frequently too brief. As an example, he cites the study published this month in Nature by the ENCODE Project Consortium [the ENCODE “main paper”] . It ascribes generic tasks such as “data analysis”, “writing” or “scientific management” to large sets of authors, making it impossible to tell, for example, who analysed which data.
“
linkstream2 microblog 