1. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Weekly Quiz

2. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She doesn’t take compliments well. B. She doesn’t take complements well.

3. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She doesn’t take compliments well. B. She doesn’t take complements well.

4. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He’s not rational at that time of the day. B. He’s not rationale at that time of the day.

5. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He’s not rational at that time of the day. B. He’s not rationale at that time of the day.

6. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Her rationale was that the drugs would help alleviate the pain. B. Her rational was that the drugs would help alleviate the pain.

7. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Her rationale was that the drugs would help alleviate the pain. B. Her rational was that the drugs would help alleviate the pain.

8. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. We worked on localizing proteins in the cell from their phylogenetic profiles. B. We worked on locating proteins in the cell from their phylogenetic profiles.

9. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. We worked on localizing proteins in the cell from their phylogenetic profiles. B. We worked on locating proteins in the cell from their phylogenetic profiles.

10. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. That action violated her principles. B. That action violated her principals.

11. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. That action violated her principles. B. That action violated her principals.

12. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Cream and chocolate comprise chocolate sauce. B. Cream and chocolate compose chocolate sauce.

13. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Cream and chocolate comprise chocolate sauce. B. Cream and chocolate compose chocolate sauce.

14. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The dessert was comprised of cream and chocolate. B. The dessert was composed of cream and chocolate.

15. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The dessert was comprised of cream and chocolate. B. The dessert was composed of cream and chocolate.

16. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Chocolate sauce composes cream and chocolate. B. Chocolate sauce comprises cream and chocolate.

17. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Chocolate sauce composes cream and chocolate. B. Chocolate sauce comprises cream and chocolate.

18. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Cream and chocolate are comprised in chocolate sauce. B. Cream and chocolate are composed of chocolate sauce.

19. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Cream and chocolate are comprised in chocolate sauce. B. Cream and chocolate are composed of chocolate sauce.

20. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She accepted the compliment without a word. B. She accepted the complement without a word.

21. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. She accepted the compliment without a word. B. She accepted the complement without a word.

22. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The sequencing of the human genome has been compared to a schoolyard brawl. B. The sequencing of the human genome has been compared with a schoolyard brawl.

23. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The sequencing of the human genome has been compared to a schoolyard brawl. B. The sequencing of the human genome has been compared with a schoolyard brawl..

24. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. You should take some ice cream; it’s complimentary. B. You should take some ice cream; it’s complementary.

25. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. You should take some ice cream; it’s complimentary. B. You should take some ice cream; it’s complementary.

26. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. The 20-pound weight loss helped his self- confidence. B. The 20 pound weight loss helped his self- confidence.

27. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He was very complimentary of your work. B. He was very complementary of your work.

28. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. He was very complimentary of your work. B. He was very complementary of your work.

29. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Red and green are complementary colors. B. Red and green are complimentary colors.

30. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Red and green are complementary colors. B. Red and green are complimentary colors. --Complementary colors are located directly across from each other on the color wheel. --Complementary pairs contrast because they share no common colors. (For example, red and green are complements, because green is made of blue and yellow.)

31. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Each person is responsible for their grade. B. Each person is responsible for his grade.

32. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 A. Each person is responsible for their grade. B. Each person is responsible for his grade.

33. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Lecture Five, July 20, 2005 : Overview of Grant Proposals and Scientific Manuscripts

34. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Grant Proposals (will primarily review NIH- type proposals here)

35. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grants overview NIH funding criteria: 1.Significance: ability of the project to improve health 2.Approach: feasibility of your methods and appropriateness of the budget 3.Innovation: originality of your approach 4.Investigator: training and experience of investigator(s) 5.Environment: suitability of facilities and adequacy of support from your institution

36. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grants overview NIH Grant Proposals: Title Abstract Specific Aims Background & Significance Preliminary Studies Experimental Design and Methods Appendix

37. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Grants help online NIH Grant Proposals http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/oer.htm “All About Grants” tutorials: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm

38. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Writing tips straight from the NIH website:

39. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Summary of NIH grant-writing tips A few reviewers will be familiar with your techniques or field, but the majority will not be Write to teach your audience (like a Scientific American article) Write and organize your application so the primary reviewer can readily grasp and explain what you are proposing. Most likely the other reviewers will read only your abstract, significance, and specific aims. Keep these simple and nontechnical (big picture). All reviewers are important because each reviewer gets one vote. Tips from the NIH on writing a grant: 1. Write to Your Audience

40. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Caveat: “Be very careful with your highly technical material. Some of the reviewers may be better informed about your field than you. To succeed, you will have to be at least as savvy as the savviest reviewer in the group. Leave out anything that's not critical. The more you put in, the more information there is for reviewers to find fault or disagree with.”

41. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Tell the reviewers: why testing your hypothesis is worth funding why you are the person to do it how your institution can give you the support you'll need The innovation criterion can be tricky: Beware of being far outside the mainstream of thought. If your proposal is highly innovative, you'll need to make a very strong case for why you are challenging the existing paradigm and have data to support your innovative approach. 2. “Be Persuasive, But Be Careful of Being Too Innovative”

42. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips ~Make your application user friendly (reviewers get worn out having to read 10 to 15 applications!): Label all materials clearly Keep it short and simple Start with basic ideas and move progressively to more complex ones (recall inverted pyramid!) Guide reviewers with graphics (visually appealing) Edit and proofread 3. Make Life Easy for Reviewers

43. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Problem not important enough. Study not likely to produce useful information. Studies based on a shaky hypothesis or data. Alternative hypotheses not considered. Methods unsuited to the objective. Problem more complex than investigator appears to realize. Not significant to health-related research (NIH mission). Too little detail in the research plan to convince reviewers the investigator knows what he or she is doing (no recognition of potential problems and pitfalls). 4. Familiarize yourself with the primary reasons projects don’t get funded:

44. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Proposal driven by technology (i.e., a method in search of a problem). Issue is scientifically premature. Over-ambitious research plan with an unrealistically large amount of work. Direction or sense of priority not clearly defined (i.e., the experiments do not follow from one another), lack a clear starting or finishing point. Lack of original or new ideas. Investigator too inexperienced with the proposed techniques. Proposed project a fishing expedition lacking solid scientific basis (i.e., no basic scientific question being addressed).

45. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Rationale for experiments not provided (why important, or how relevant to the hypothesis). Experiments too dependent on success of an initial proposed experiment. Lack of alternative methods in case the primary approach does not work out. Proposed model system not appropriate to address the proposed questions. Relevant controls not included. Proposal lacking enough preliminary data or preliminary data do not support project's feasibility. Insufficient consideration of statistical needs. Not clear which data were obtained by the investigator and which reported by others.

46. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Write with these pitfalls in mind! Convince the reviewers that your project doesn’t have one of these fatal flaws (cover all your bases).

47. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Start with an outline. Write a topic sentence for each main topic. Make one point in each paragraph. Paragraphs have two functions: they aggregate information point by point and they break up the page, creating much-needed white space. Keep them short. Divide the document into sections and subsections. Include bullets and lists. Use short sentences with a basic structure: subject, verb, object. Keep sentence average to 20 words or less. Keep subject, verb, and object together at the beginning of the sentence. 5.Write, Edit, and Proof Like a Pro (apply what you’ve learned in HRP 214!) Straight from the NIH website:

48. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips More tips from the NIH… Keep related ideas and information together Use strong, active verbs Use verbs instead of abstract nouns. Turn abstract nouns ending in 'ion' and 'ment' into verbs. For example, say 'creating the assay leads to...' rather than 'the creation of the assay leads to...' If writing is not your forte, get help.

49. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips 6. Edit Before Sending in Your Application Edit out redundant words and phrases (cut, cut, cut!) Get outside opinions on the writing and presentation. Cross-check all data and information for consistency. After you're finished, leave it for a few days, then go back and read it again. Highlight and review your conclusions. Is there any way your supporting facts might lead a reader to different conclusions? Make sure you've supported all facts with citations. Edit and proofread thoroughly. Have others proofread as well, including nonscientists with strong English skills (work with a good editor!)

50. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grant-writing tips Also note two small points for NIH proposals: 1. NIH discourages (and, for some categories of proposals, explicitly forbids) using URLs in the application for source material. 2. Include only information that will photocopy well since your application will be photocopied before it is sent to reviewers.

51. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH grants overview NIH Grant Proposals: Title Abstract Specific Aims Background & Significance Preliminary Studies Experimental Design and Methods Appendix

52. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Title

53. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Title Keep to word or character limit (NIH has 56-character limit, including the spaces between words and punctuation). Identify topics, purpose, and novel aspects or methodology Choose a title that is specifically descriptive, rather than general. Be accurate, complete, specific, and concise. Avoid jargon, unnecessary details, and abbreviations. A new application must have a different title from any other PHS project with the same principal investigator/program director.

54. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Abstract

55. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Abstract Abstract 200 word limit for NIH Keep it simple and broad. The abstract is read by all of the reviewers and is of critical importance. Includes: 1.Broad research question 2.Hypothesis to be tested (*remember NIH primarily funds hypothesis-driven research) 3.Overview of specific aims 4.Statement of the significance of the research and how it is innovative 5.Outline of the methods Excludes confidential or proprietary information

56. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Specific Aims

57. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Specific Aims Specific Aims One page is recommended. Limit to 3 or 4 specific aims. The specific aims are read by all of the reviewers and are of critical importance. Write in clear, focused, non-technical terms. The Specific Aims are a list of: The broad, long-term objectives and what the specific research proposed in this application is intended to accomplish, e.g..: to test a stated hypothesis, to create a novel design, to solve a specific problem, OR to develop new technology

58. Specific Aims formats, prepared by: Lorene Nelson, PhD Associate Professor Chief, Division of Epidemiology Department of Health Research and Policy Stanford University School of Medicine

59. Alternative 1 State overall objective... We propose to address this objective by testing the following hypotheses: 1. 2. 3. 4. (maximum of 3-4 hypotheses)... To test these hypotheses, we will address the following specific aims: 1. 2. 3. 4. (maximum of 3-4 specific aims)

60. Alternative 2 The primary study objective is to, and will address 3 hypotheses of interest: Hypothesis 1: Describe hypothesis or state as question. Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis Hypothesis 2: Describe hypothesis or state as question. Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis Hypothesis 3: Describe hypothesis or state as question. Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis Can include 1-2 secondary hypotheses if absolutely necessary.

61. Alternative 3 State overall objective Specific Aim # 1: To Put specific aim in context of literature or state significance State hypothesis (can do in form of a question) Briefly describe method or innovative approach to address SA Specific Aim # 2: To Put specific aim in context of literature or state significance State hypothesis (can do in form of a question) Briefly describe method or innovative approach to address SA Specific Aim # 3: (try to limit to 2-3 primary aims) Can include 1-2 secondary specific aims if absolutely necessary.

62. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Background & Significance

63. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Background & Significance Background and Significance Two to three pages recommended This is NOT a literature review Do not attempt to be exhaustive; limit to 30-50 key citations Tell it like a story Critical Elements: 1.Briefly sketch the pivotal work leading up to yours 2.Critically evaluate existing knowledge 3.Specifically identify the gaps that the project is intended to fill 4.State concisely the importance and health relevance of the research. Note: this does not mean convincing the researchers that the disease to which the research relates is significant.

64. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Preliminary Studies

65. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Preliminary Studies Preliminary Studies Preliminary data are an essential part of a research grant application. They establish the ability of you and your research team to carry out the proposed studies. Critical Elements: 1.Provide an account of the principal investigator/program director's preliminary studies pertinent to the application 2.Establish the experience and competence of the investigator 3.Help reviewers assess the likelihood of success of the proposed project.

66. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Experimental Design and Methods

67. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Experimental Design and Methods Experimental Design and Methods Describe the research design and the procedures to be used to accomplish the specific aims of the project. Note: 25-page limit for the complete “Research Plan” (specific aims, background & significance, preliminary studies, and experimental design and methods).

68. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Experimental Design and Methods Experimental Design and Methods Describe: 1.How the data will be collected 2.How the data will be analyzed and interpreted (statistics) 3. Data sharing plans as appropriate 4.Any new methodologies and their advantages 5. Potential difficulties and limitations of the proposed procedures 6.Any hazardous procedures, situations, or materials that may be and the precautions that will be followed to maximize safety Also, provide a tentative sequence or timetable for the project.

69. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 NIH Grant Proposals Appendix

70. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Appendix Appendix materials may include: 1.Up to 10 publications, manuscripts (accepted for publication), abstracts, patents, or other printed materials directly relevant to this project. 2.Surveys, questionnaires, data collection instruments, and clinical protocols. 3.Original glossy photographs or color images of gels, micrographs, etc., IF a photocopy (may be reduced in size) is also included within the 25-page limit of the research plan. Note: Do not use the appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the research plan.

71. Also needed: cover letter Contains: Application’s title States the discipline/s involved If applicable: A list of people who should not review the application and why. That the application is in response to a RFA or PA That the application was previously submitted in response to an RFA or PA That you’ve enclosed the required institute approval documentation for a grant over $500,000

72. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Scientific Manuscripts Scientific Manuscripts (original research)

73. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Scientific Manuscripts Scientific Manuscripts (original research) 1.Submission process 2.Components: Title Authors Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results (inc. figures and tables) Discussion Acknowledgements References

74. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Scientific Manuscripts: outline for class Title Authorship Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results (includes figures and tables) Discussion Acknowledgements References

75. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Scientific Manuscripts: outline for class Title** Authorship** Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results (includes figures and tables) Discussion Acknowledgements** References**

76. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Scientific Manuscripts Submission process 1.Identify a journal for submission 2.Follow that journal’s style guidelines (online) 3.Submit your manuscript with a cover letter some require written signature from all authors 4.Possible outcomes: accepted, accepted pending revisions, rejected but re-submission possible, no resubmission possible 5.Revision and resubmission: re-submit with cover letter that addresses reviewers critiques point by point 6.Once accepted, author approves final proofs

77. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Resubmission Cover Letter Date Editor Editor’s Address Subject: Revised Manuscript, MS#: Dear Dr. Editor, Enclosed are xx copies of the revised paper (changes are highlighted on one of the copies), “Title.” We appreciate your helpful comments and those of the reviewers. Correspondence should be sent to: Corresponding Author’s: Address, Email, Phone, Fax We have made revisions based on the comments/suggestions of Reviewers I and II. The comments of each reviewer are numbered below, with our response (clarifications and changes) following.

78. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Resubmission Cover Letter, Continued Reviewer I: 1. There is little discussion of xxx We agree with Reviewers I and II that the section on xxx was too abbreviated. Therefore, we have added a paragraph that highlights xxx (paragraph 33). 2. Could you comment on xx We have added a sentence to paragraph 9 in Methods/Materials that comments on xx... Thank you again for your helpful comments. Please let us know if any other revisions are required. Regards, Corresponding Author

79. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Title Succinct Specific Informative

80. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Authorship 1. Who gets authorship? Any author listed on the paper’s title page should take public responsibility for its content. 2. In what order? Order implies authors’ relative contributions Keep in mind: visibility often goes three deep. In some labs, the head of the lab or research team is automatically included on any paper coming from the lab, as senior author, second author, or last- listed author For fairness, alphabetical or reverse alphabetical order may be used if researchers have contributed equally. Large working groups may be cited as a group

81. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Authorship Conflict of Interest. Most journals ask authors to disclose relevant conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript, in their cover letter or on a specific form.

82. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Acknowledgements Funding sources Contributors who did not get authorship (e.g. offered materials, advice or consultation that was not significant enough to merit authorship).

83. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 References Use a computerized bibliographic program. Follow journal guidelines (may request alphabetical listing or order of appearance in the text). Follow standard abbreviations (can be found online). Some journals limit number of references allowed.

84. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Besides research papers, Other types of articles include: The case report The review article or meta-analysis The opinion paper/editorial

85. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 Top 5

86. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 1. ALLUDE v. ELUDE allude: to reference indirectly  She frequently alluded to her distrust of lawyers without explicitly stating her opinion.  He impressed the crowd with his allusions to Greek mythology. (n.b.: versus “illusion”) elude: to evade  The stealthy cat-burglar eluded the police all winter.  The elusive protein, which our team has been trying to characterize for months, has baffled labs across the country.

87. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 2.AMONG v. BETWEEN Among: collective and undefined relations (three or more) You’re among friends. Agreement was reached among all four neighbors. Between: one-to-one relationships of pairs within a group or the sense “shared by.” Diplomatic relationships between the United States and France ceased. There is close friendship between the members of the club.

88. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 3.LAY v. LIE Lay is a transitive verb (takes an object) forms: lay, laid, has laid, is laying The hen lays an egg. (laid, had laid, is laying) “The best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men / Gang aft a-gley.” (“To a Mouse,” Robert Burns) Lie is an intransitive verb (does not take an object) forms: lie, lay, has lain, is lying The llama lies down.  Q: What about “Now I lay me down to sleep”???

89. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 4. DISINTERESTED v. UNINTERESTED Disinterested: impartial. Uninterested: not interested in. Let a disinterested person judge our dispute. This man is obviously uninterested in our dispute.

90. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 5.e.g. v. i.e. (informal) e.g. = “for example” from Latin: exempli gratia = ‘for the sake of an example’  Many animals (e.g., mountain lions, panthers, etc.) are quite good hunters. i.e. = “in other words” from Latin: id est = ‘that is’  That walking boot is synthetic (i.e., not leather or suede).

91. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 For next week Homework: Read chapter 1 of Successful Scientific Writing (pp. 1-22) 3-4 unit students: Write a rough draft of your abstract or specific aims.

92. Scientific Writing, HRP 214 For next week Next time… Abstracts, Introductions, and Discussions