scholarly journals Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Rittenbach ◽  
Candice G. Horne ◽  
Terence O’Riordan ◽  
Allison Bichel ◽  
Nicholas Mitchell ◽  
...  

AbstractPeople with lived experience are individuals who have first-hand experience of the medical condition(s) being considered. The value of including the viewpoints of people with lived experience in health policy, health care, and health care and systems research has been recognized at many levels, including by funding agencies. However, there is little guidance or established best practices on how to include non-academic reviewers in the grant review process. Here we describe our approach to the inclusion of people with lived experience in every stage of the grant review process. After a budget was created for a specific call, a steering committee was created. This group included researchers, people with lived experience, and health systems administrators. This group developed and issued the call. After receiving proposals, stage one was scientific review by researchers. Grants were ranked by this score and a short list then reviewed by people with lived experience as stage two. Finally, for stage three, the Steering Committee convened and achieved consensus based on information drawn from stages one and two. Our approach to engage people with lived experience in the grant review process was positively reviewed by everyone involved, as it allowed for patient perspectives to be truly integrated. However, it does lengthen the review process. The proposed model offers further practical insight into including people with lived experience in the review process.

1986 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 726-727
Author(s):  
RS Mackenzie ◽  
RE Martin
Keyword(s):  

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 94-98
Author(s):  
Marc Brodsky

The Kabuki Actors Study set out to explore the health status of Kabuki actors, their performance-related medical problems, and the nature and extent of their health care. Two hundred sixteen Kabuki performers voluntarily completed an anonymous three-page survey addressing their health issues. Thirty-eight percent of the actors reported a history of at least one significant medical condition, and 88% of them identified at least one musculoskeletal or nonmusculoskeletal problem associated with performance. Sixty-nine percent of the performers had visited a physician over the preceding year, and 30% of them had consulted nonphysician medical practitioners. Kabuki actors, the Kabuki management, and physicians can use the findings of this study as a starting point to investigate why these injuries occur and how to prevent and treat them. Pain severity scales or other measurable outcomes of therapy can be used to compare the efficacies of physician and nonphysician treatments.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Smigelski-Theiss ◽  
Malisa Gampong ◽  
Jill Kurasaki

Obesity is a complex medical condition that has psychosocial and physiological implications for those suffering from the disease. Factors contributing to obesity such as depression, childhood experiences, and the physical environment should be recognized and addressed. Weight bias and stigmatization by health care providers and bedside clinicians negatively affect patients with obesity, hindering those patients from receiving appropriate care. To provide optimal care of patients with obesity or adiposity, health care providers must understand the physiological needs and requirements of this population while recognizing and addressing their own biases. The authors describe psychosocial and environmental factors that contribute to obesity, discuss health care providers’ weight biases, and highlight implications for acute care of patients suffering from obesity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 2519-2521
Author(s):  
Jonathan Chernoff

Much has been written about the seemingly capricious manner by which grant proposals are ranked and awarded by the National Institutes of Health and similar agencies, yet some scientists are able to maintain stable funding over long periods of time. While raw luck may certainly play a role in this process, particularly when paylines are tight, it is also possible that skill—in the art of grant writing at least—could represent a decisive factor. Here, I submit that, even as we attempt to reform and one day perfect the grant review process, there are actions that applicants can take today to get better results from the system we have.


2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 367-374
Author(s):  
Melinda L. Jenkins

One of the best ways to contribute to multidisciplinary research and to improve your own knowledge of the review process at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is to serve as a peer reviewer for research, traineeship, and small business innovation research proposals. Proactive targeted outreach to Scientific Review Officers (SROs) at NIH will increase your chances to become a reviewer. Reviewers with nursing expertise are especially welcome as multidisciplinary research is becoming more prevalent. Steps to identify a likely study section, contact the correct SRO, and review responsibly are described in this article, written by an experienced NIH review officer.


10.28945/2980 ◽  
2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yair Levy ◽  
Timothy J. Ellis

This paper introduces an initial effort towards developing a framework for writing an effective literature review. The target audience for the framework are novice IS researchers or other researchers who are constantly struggling with the development of an effective literature-based foundation for the proposed research. The proposed framework follows the systematic data processing approach comprised of three major stages: 1) inputs (literature gathering and screening), 2) processing (Blooms Taxonomy), and 3) outputs (writing the review). This paper provides the rationale for developing a solid literature review and addresses the central stage, processing the literature. The paper concludes by providing arguments for the value of an effective literature review as well as implications for future work in this proposed framework.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Tabano ◽  
Thomas Gill ◽  
Kathryn Anzuoni ◽  
Heather Allore ◽  
Ann Gruber-Baldini ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 217
Author(s):  
Sharon L Larson ◽  
Marc Williams ◽  
Ella Thompson ◽  
Amber Eruchalu ◽  
Lela McFarland

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document