Integrating Statistical and Clinical Research Elements in Intervention-Related Grant Applications: Summary From an NIMH Workshop
- 27 Downloads
The authors summarize points for consideration generated in a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) workshop convened to provide an opportunity for reviewers from different disciplines—specifically clinical researchers and statisticians—to discuss how their differing and complementary expertise can be well integrated in the review of intervention-related grant applications.
A 1-day workshop was convened in October, 2004. The workshop featured panel presentations on key topics followed by interactive discussion. This article summarizes the workshop and subsequent discussions, which centered on topics including weighting the statistics/data analysis elements of an application in the assessment of the application’s overall merit; the level of statistical sophistication appropriate to different stages of research and for different funding mechanisms; some key considerations in the design and analysis portions of applications; appropriate statistical methods for addressing essential questions posed by an application; and the role of the statistician in the application’s development, study conduct, and interpretation and dissemination of results.
A number of key elements crucial to the construction and review of grant applications were identified. It was acknowledged that intervention-related studies unavoidably involve trade-offs. Reviewers are helped when applications acknowledge such trade-offs and provide good rationale for their choices. Clear linkage among the design, aims, hypotheses, and data analysis plan and avoidance of disconnections among these elements also strengthens applications.
The authors identify multiple points to consider when constructing intervention-related grant applications. The points are presented here as questions and do not reflect institute policy or comprise a list of best practices, but rather represent points for consideration.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Rounsaville BJ, Carroll KM, Onken LS: A stage model of behavioral therapies research: getting started and moving on from stage I. Clin Psychol: Science and Practice 2001; 8: 133–142Google Scholar
- 3.Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, et al: False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Center Report 1987; 20–24Google Scholar
- 4.Leber PD: The hazards of inference: the active control investigation. Epilepsia 1986; 30(suppl 1): S57–S63Google Scholar
- 7.National Advisory Mental Health Council: Treatment Research in Mental Illness: Improving the Nation’s Public Mental Health Care through NIMH Funded Interventions Research: A Report by the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Workgroup on Clinical Trials 2005. Available at http://www.nimh.nih.gov/council/interventions_research.cfm
- 11.Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988Google Scholar
- 17.Roberts LW, Solomon Z, Roberts BB, et al: Ethics in psychiatry research. Acad Psychiatry 1998; 22: 1–20Google Scholar
- 19.American Statistical Association Committee on Professional Ethics: Ethical guidelines for statistical practice, 1999. Available at http://www.amstat.org/
- 20.Tilley A: An Introduction to Research Methodology and Report Writing in Psychology. Brisbane, Calif, Pineapple Press, 1999Google Scholar
- 22.Bailar JC III: Communicating about statistics with a scientific audience, in Medical Use of Statistics. Edited by Bailar JC III, Mosteller F. NEJM Books, Waltham, Mass, 1986Google Scholar