Presentation on theme: "Research Design Service West Midlands RfPB Research Funding Application Workshop 28 th February 2014."— Presentation transcript:
Research Design Service West Midlands RfPB Research Funding Application Workshop 28 th February 2014
How does RfPB work? 10 'Regional Advisory Committees' Applications that relate to health service challenges, regionally or locally, will be particularly welcome. As a responsive rather than a commissioning programme, RfPB does not seek to name specific topic areas and welcomes applications on a wide range of issues. Potential applicants are encouraged to visit the programme website (www.rfpb.nihr.ac.uk) for the most up-to-date information before submitting an application.www.rfpb.nihr.ac.uk There is a regularly updated list of ‘frequently asked questions’ (FAQs) on the RfPB website to supplement this guidance. ‘frequently asked questions’
Who can apply? All NHS bodies and other providers of NHS services in England are eligible to apply, provided they are capable of fulfilling the role of a research sponsor as set out in the Research Governance Framework for Health & Care. Applications must come from such organisations in England which are able to fulfil the role of research sponsor.
What is funded? £350k/36 months Research which is related to the day-to-day practice of health service staff and is concerned with having an impact on the health of users of the NHS. Funded research projects are likely to fall into the areas of health service research and public health research, although other areas are not excluded from the programme. The research projects will use quantitative or qualitative methods to: – Study the provision and use of NHS services. – Evaluate the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of interventions. – Examine the resource utilisation of alternative means for healthcare delivery. – Formally scrutinise innovations and developments. – Pilot or consider the feasibility of research requiring major award applications to other funders.
Why does patient and public involvement matter? Applications which have emerged from interaction with patients and the public, which relate to patient and service user experience, and which have been drawn up in association with a relevant group of service users will be particularly welcome. In all cases, however, potential trajectory to patient benefit will be a major selection criterion.
Not funded? Laboratory-based research or basic science research, including research based on animal models. Setting up or maintaining research units. Applications which are solely service developments. Although the programme will fund research aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a service or intervention, it will not fund the costs of providing the service or intervention itself. Applications which are solely: audit, survey, needs assessment, technology development (although these elements may be part of an integrated research study). Systematic reviews may be funded as part of a larger research project or as stand-alone studies. For more details, http://www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/RfPB/Pages/FAQ.aspx#22 http://www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/RfPB/Pages/FAQ.aspx#22
RfPB Programme Director Prof David Armstrong The main reason for RfPB funding failure is: Picking the wrong research question What makes a good question?
Five basic tests of a good question Will you get a real answer to a real problem? Is it timely? Is it original (but not too original)? Is it plausible? How risky is it?
Is it the right question? What is the problem? – Don’t assume that the funding panel will know about your area of clinical interest – How many people does it affect? How does it affect them? Why does this matter? Will your research provide the answer to the problem? – Will it just be a stepping stone to the answer?
Is your research timely? Will your research findings produce applicable changes in services which will lead to patient benefit within 5 years? Will your research still be relevant in 17 years from now, or is it a problem that will disappear over time?
How do you know how original it is? Have you done a thorough systematic review? – Has anyone else? If not, have you had a thorough look at the relevant literature? Is someone else already answering this question? See UK Clinical Trials Gateway http://www.ukctg.nihr.ac.uk/default.aspx
Are you being too original? Is your idea too strange and different to convince other people that it’s the right approach? – Dance classes for dementia? Is your idea so narrow that only a very few people will either understand it or benefit from it?
Does your idea sound plausible? Do we already know enough to be able to see that your effect sizes are realistic? – Have you just plucked some wildly optimistic numbers from thin air?
Risk Will your methods give us the wrong answer or no answer at all? What evidence is that participants can be recruited to your study? Are there enough potential participants to provide a definitive answer? What is the distance from patient benefit? – Greater distance, greater the risk
Reminder: Five basic tests of a good question Will you get a real answer to a real problem? Is it timely? Is it original (but not too original)? Is it plausible? How risky is it?