Dr. Scott Filler_Approach Section_Basic Science_2024.pptx

Dr. Scott Filler: How to Structure the “Approach” Section of a Grant Application.

1. Approach (Basic Science) Scott G. Filler, M.D. Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center [email protected]

2. Preliminary Data Present compelling preliminary data Supports premise of the work Demonstrates feasibility Sparks interest, but leaves reviewer wanting to learn more Potential pitfalls in preliminary data Clear weaknesses No statistical analysis Support alternative hypothesis

3. Source : Yeaman & Filler [2024] Optimizing Visuals in Grant Writing. 3 Key Issues for Figures Use visuals to emphasize points critical to your central hypothesis Make sure any visuals reinforce your overarching narrative Sprinkle visuals throughout the proposal to reduce density Do not leave interpretations of visuals up to reviewers Legend font size may be less than that in the narrative text Yeaman & Filler – 2024 /

4. Source : Yeaman & Filler [2024] Optimizing Visuals in Grant Writing. 4 Yeaman – 2024 / Key Issues for Figures Clearly address every element of a visual in legend & text Orient reader: R  L; T  B; minimize empty / white space Use consistent color scheme; point to key items in a figure Less is more: keep each figure or chart simple and focused, without extraneous data Ensure that all text is large and clear enough for readability Avoid issues related to color blindness

5. 5 Developing Effective Figure Legends Interpretive vs. Neutral Title: provide conclusion as the title Active vs. Passive Voicing: figure data must justify conclusion Leverage Opportunities: add strategic experimental details Provide Data Justification: include error bars / statistical values Sequence as Grant Outline: figures should reflect grant flow Source : Yeaman & Filler [2024] Optimizing Visuals in Grant Writing.

6. 6 Figure 5. O2 levels in COVID patients. Example: What is Wrong with This Picture? Percent Pulse oximeter O2 95 94 93 92 91 90 Source : Yeaman & Filler [2024] Optimizing Visuals in Grant Writing. Yeaman & Filler – 2024 / Condensed y-axis scale No error bars No statistical analysis Cryptic, uninformative legend Not readable if red-green color blind

7. Approach Describe overall approach and the controls Only mention key details Need power calculations for animal studies Many details of animal studies can be move to Vertebrate Animals section Address sex as a biological variable

8. Approach Potential pitfalls One aim depend on another Excessive detail Detracts from overall message Target for criticism Densely written prose “If reading a grant gives the reviewer a headache, that grant is unlikely to receive a good score”

9. Source : NIH / Center for Scientific Review [2023] Target Your Application. Access: www.public.csr.nih.gov 9 Anticipated Outcomes & Potential Pitfalls: Major Keys to Success Addresses the reviewer question: “ Why Should I Care ?” Reflects critical thinking and careful scientific methods Opportunity to describe future directions / logical steps Emphasizes the importance of knowledge to be gained Represents circumspection and investigator humility

10. Anticipated Results and Potential Pitfalls—Key Points Focus on conceptual issues rather than technical details What will you do if data do not support hypothesis? Don’t say, “The investigative team has substantial experience with this work and thus do not anticipate any technical problems.” Never present a potential pitfall for which you don’t have a good solution

11. 11 Matrix of Outcomes from the Reviewer Viewpoint Validation Interest Grant Writer Expectation Surprising Low Interest Surprising High Interest X 

12. Source : NIH / Center for Scientific Review [2023] Target Your Application. Access: www.public.csr.nih.gov 12 Approach to Writing Outcomes & Pitfalls Humility: use non-arrogant language (expect to versus will) Admit obvious limitations in study scope, methods, design Turn uncertainty into strength: leverage virtual certainties Alternatives are at least as interesting as original hypothesis Craft interesting and plausible scenarios that you can study Maintain narrative style for good storytelling of scenarios

13. 13 Because of the heterogeneity of the patients, it is virtually certain that no single genetic or epigenetic signature will explain the outcome every patient . Therefore, we will also investigate whether specific signatures are seen in isolates from subgroups of patients, such as those who are immunocompetent vs. immunosuppressed. Turning Key Weaknesses into Strengths

14. 14 Because the immune system of immunocompetent hosts likely imposes greater stress on the infecting organism and induces greater pathogen genomic instability, is possible that the immune status of the host will influence genetic and epigenetic signatures of the infecting organism. We are poised to pursue this line of investigation should we encounter this interesting scenario . Establish Pathway to Logical Next Steps

15. 15 Because humans may respond differently than mice, it is certainly possible that that we will find that factors that are dispensable for virulence in mice are significant determinants of persistence in humans. Our approach to leveraging advanced bioinformatics and modeling to analyze the data in an unbiased manner holds promise to yield new insights into the factors that determine outcomes in humans – factors that cannot be detected in mouse studies. Interesting No Matter What We May Find

16. Future Directions Where is your research going? What will be its impact? How can the specific information learn be applied to a broader question?