Grant for half-time research position in a clinical environment

Please refer to the application form in Prisma in parallel with reading the instructions below, which describe the call-specific content of the application. More information on what to do in practical terms is available in our Guide for applicants Opens in new window..

Language

Foreign experts are involved in the scientific assessment of the applications. To ensure fair and equitable assessment and efficient processing, please therefore complete your application in English.

Sections of the application

The application form includes the following tabs:

• Descriptive information
• Research description
• Budget and research resources
• Publications
• Administrating organisation
• Review panels
• Participants (only administrators in this call)
• CV

Descriptions of the call-specific information requested under each tab follow below.

Descriptive information

Abstract

The abstract shall include a brief description of the following:

• what is to be done: purpose and aim
• how the research will be carried out: project organisation, time plan and the scientific methods to be used
• what is important about the planned research.
  

The abstract shall provide a summary guide to the purpose and implementation of the research. Please use wording to ensure persons with another subject specialisation can understand the information.

The description may cover a maximum of 1 500 characters including blank spaces (approximately one third of an A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing).

Popular science description

Describe the project in such a way that a person who is not familiar with the subject can understand it. Describe what is to be done and why, and explain in what way the new knowledge may be important.

The popular science description is an important tool when we inform about the research funded by the Swedish Research Council. If we grant your application, we reserve the right to use the description for information purposes.

Note: The popular science description must be written in Swedish, unlike the rest of the application.

The description may cover a maximum of 4 500 characters including blank spaces (approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing).

Deductible time

Please state any longer interruptions in your active research time after your doctoral degree caused by any of the grounds recognised by the Swedish Research Council. The interruption shall be calculated as a full-time equivalent and be rounded up into full calendar months. Please see the recognised grounds for deductible time under the heading “Career age” above.

Research description

Ethical considerations

Describe the ethical issues raised by your project or corresponding. You must also describe how you plan to address ethical dilemmas that may arise. Please justify why the research should be carried out against the background of the ethical issues you have identified. How do your research questions and expected results measure up in relation to the ethical issues? Please also state whether the research involves any handling of personal data, or experiments on animals or human subjects. If no ethical issues are raised, please justify this.

Sex and gender perspectives

Please state whether sex and gender perspectives are applicable in your planned research, and justify your decision. Please note that we are not asking for information about the composition of the research team (men/women). Read more about sex and gender perspectives in research content. Opens in new window.

The following applies:

• If you answer “Yes”: Justify your answer, and describe also how you take account of sex and gender perspectives in the research plan (see further instructions under “Research plan”). If you have stated that sex and gender perspectives are applicable, but still choose not to include them in your research plan, you will need to justify this here.
• If you answer “No”: Please justify your answer.

Research plan

The research plan shall consist of a brief but complete description of the research task. The focus of the research plan shall be forward-looking, and it shall cover a maximum of 10 page-numbered A4 pages in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing, including references and any images.

The research plan shall include the following headings and information, listed in the following order:

• Purpose and aims: State the overall purpose and specific goals of the research project. If you have stated that sex and gender perspectives are applicable, please describe how these perspectives relate to the purpose, goal and questions of the research project.
• State-of-the-art: Summarise briefly the current research frontier within the field/area covered by the project. State key references. Describe briefly how sex and gender perspectives have been handled previously within the field/area the project relates to.
• Significance and scientific novelty: Describe briefly how the project relates to previous research within the area, and its importance in the short and long term. Describe also how the project moves forward or innovates the current research frontier. Please include sex and gender perspectives when relevant.
• Preliminary and previous results: Describe briefly your own previous research and pilot studies within the research area that make it probable that the project will be feasible. State also if no preliminary results exist. State whether the project contributes further to research and scientific results from a grant awarded previously by the Swedish Research Council.
• Project description: Describe the project design, including the following items:
  • Theory and method: Describe the underlying theory and the methods to be applied in order to reach the project goal. When applicable, describe how sex and gender perspectives relate to the choice of design, questions, method and materials, population/study participants and also data processing and analysis, for example statistics and presentation of results divided up by sex.
  • Time plan and implementation: Describe summarily the time plan for the project during the grant period, and how the project will be implemented.
  • Project organisation: Clarify the contributions of yourself and any other researchers to the implementation of the project, including a description of competences and roles in the project.
    

Provide the following information also. If a heading is not relevant to your application, please leave it blank.

• Data analysis and statistics: Modern methods often generate complex data. Describe how you plan to analyse data collected in the project, and the statistical methods used. If the project covers clinical studies, please include a power analysis.
• Equipment: Describe the basic equipment you and your team have at your disposal for the project.
• Need for infrastructure: Specify the project’s need for international and national infrastructure. Specify also the need for local infrastructure, if depreciation costs for this is included in the application. Read more about research infrastructure supported by the Swedish Research Council Opens in new window..
• International and national collaboration: Describe your collaboration with foreign and Swedish researchers and research teams. State whether you contribute to or refer to international collaboration in your research.
• Other applications or grants: If you are applying for or intend to apply for other grants from the Swedish Research Council, the relationship between the projects shall be clarified. This applies also if you are receiving ongoing grants from the Swedish Research Council with grant periods that wholly or partly overlap with the grant you are now applying for. You should also justify why you are submitting one or several further applications. Describe also the relationship with other applications to or grants from other funding bodies for the same project concept (from you or another researcher).
• Independent line of research: If you are working or will be working in a larger group, please clarify how your project relates to the other projects in the group. If you are continuing a project that was wholly or partly started during your doctoral or postdoc studies, you must also describe the relationship between your project and the research of your former supervisor.
• Clinical significance: Explain how the results of the project may be transferred into practical clinical use within the area medicine and health.
  

Specification of clinical position

In order to apply for a grant for employment as a half-time researcher in a clinical environment, you must hold a clinical position in Sweden, such as a physician, nurse, physiotherapist, occupational therapist or dentist, corresponding to at least 50 per cent of a full-time equivalent during the grant period. Describe in what way you fulfil this requirement.

The description may cover a maximum of 750 characters including blank spaces in Arial, font size 11.

Budget and research resources

Please state your activity level (per cent of a full-time equivalent) in the project. Your activity level as project leader must correspond to 50 per cent of a full-time equivalent.

The grant is a standard amount and you therefore do not need to enter any budget applied for in the application form.

Other funding

Please state your or any other researcher’s funding over and above what is applied for in this application. Please state rounded amounts in SEK.

Publications

Applicant’s publication list

Please attach your publication list drawn up according to the headings and information below. The list shall cover a maximum of 5 page-numbered A4 pages in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Please sort the publications under each heading in reverse chronological order, so that the latest publication is at the top of the list. Please only include articles or corresponding that are published or accepted for publication at the time of applying. The author order shall be identical to that of the published work. The application cannot be supplemented with publications after the deadline for the call.

1. Selection of publications: List the maximum 10 publications of greatest importance to your application. For each publication, please state how you contributed to it, and its relevance to the research project described (maximum 4 lines per publication). Highlight your name in bold in the author list.

2. Relevant publications from the last 8 years: Sort the publications, with your name highlighted in bold in the author list, under each heading (publication type) in the following order:

• Peer-reviewed original articles
• Peer-reviewed conference contributions, the results of which are not included in other publications.
• Peer-reviewed edited volumes
• Research review articles
• Peer-reviewed books and book chapters
• Other publications including popular science books/presentations

Administrating organisation

Please state the administrating organisation and project site.

Review panels

Please propose the review panel or panels (in priority order) that you wish to carry out the scientific assessment of your application.

Review panels Opens in new window.

Participants

Here you as applicant may invite participating administrators to your application.

CV

Under this tab, please upload your relevant CV information from your personal account in Prisma.

The following information, where available, must always be included in your CV, taking into account the stated limitation in numbers:

• Education: First, second and third cycle higher education and specialist degrees.
• Work: Current employment (including employment form) and longer relevant employment, postdoctoral visits (also included as employment if relevant), research exchanges relevant to the research described and any longer interruptions in the research that have impacted on your opportunity to gain merits as a researcher.
• Merits and awards: Docentship/associate professorship, supervisees (postdoctoral and doctoral students; state the overall number of each category and list the 10 most relevant to you), up to 10 of your most relevant grants awarded in competition, up to 10 of your most relevant prizes and awards, and up to 20 other merits relevant to the application.
• Intellectual property rights: For example, patents and open access computer programs developed by you; state up to 10 of your most relevant.
  

Scientific quality is the fundamental criterion when the Swedish Research Council allocates grants to research. Your application is evaluated in competition with the other applications on the basis of the following evaluation criteria.

Evaluation process

Your application is evaluated by a review panel where the members are Swedish and international researchers.

Five members review and grade your application individually. The entire review panel then meets at a review panel meeting to discuss and prioritise the applications, and finally to make a proposal for a decision to the Scientific Council for medicine and health.

Review panels Opens in new window.

A certain proportion of the applications with the lowest grades from the members’ individual reviews are screened out before the review panel meeting. These applications will not be the subject of discussion, which gives room for more detailed discussion and prioritisation of the applications of higher quality, which have a reasonable chance of being funded.

The applications screened out only receive a overall grade and a standardised final statement after the decision is made. The other applications receive an individual final statement that reflects the review panel’s discussion and overall assessment of the scientific quality of the application.

For starting grants and for grants for employment as a half-time researcher in a clinical environment, a two-stage procedure is used. Based on their scientific review, the review panels nominate applications of high quality to a second stage. At the second stage, an overall review panel makes a joint proposal for a decision.

Evaluation criteria and guiding questions

The evaluation of the scientific quality of your application is made based on four basic criteria (Scientific quality of the proposed research, Novelty and originality, Merits of the applicant, Feasibility). The purpose of using several components is to achieve a multi-faceted evaluation. In general, the scientific quality of the project receives a greater focus when evaluating applications for project grant, while the competency of the applicant is given greater weight when evaluating individual/career support. The criteria are assessed on a seven-grade scale, except for feasibility, which is assessed on a three-grade grade scale.

In addition to the basic criteria, applications for project grant 3R are also evaluated using an additional criterion (relevance) on a seven-grade scale.

For each criterion, there are guiding questions to support the panel members’ evaluation of your application. These can also function as guidance for you when you write your application.

Scientific quality of the proposed research (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Will the project, if successful, significantly advance our understanding of the field?
• Is the research proposal relevant for medical research and the definition of the problems and proposed solutions clear, convincing and compelling?
• Does the study design, its research questions and hypotheses, meet the standards of highest scientific quality?
• Are the hypotheses clearly defined and based on the appropriate literature and/or preliminary data?
• Are potential problems and alternative strategies identified and presented?
• Does the program present preliminary data to support the hypothesis?
• Are there relevant scientific collaborations?
• Are methods for data analysis and statistics well described?
• Has the applicant in a satisfactory manner described the possible importance of sex and/or gender for the research project? If not, is there a clear description to why?
• If sex and gender is described as relevant to the research project, has the applicant considered sex and gender in the description of the proposed work, for instance as part of preliminary data, the choice of samples or study population, or data analyses?

Especially for Starting Grants:

• Does the applicant demonstrate the ability to formulate scientific questions that are clearly independent of the research the applicant performed as a doctoral student and postdoc, and the research of former advisors?

Especially for 3R:

• Is the project significant to the development of methods to replace, reduce and/or refine animal experiments?

Novelty and originality (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Does the project extend or challenge current understanding, opinion or practice in its field?
• Is the project built on a unique combination of ideas, preliminary data, and different methodologies to create novel approaches to address the question at hand?
• Is there potential for creation of new knowledge, novel technologies, or new directions for research and advancement of the field?
• Will completion of the aims improve scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice?
• Does the researcher propose a line of research that has the potential to significantly advance current knowledge in the field or is he/she simply adding details to existing knowledge?

Merits of the applicant (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Does the applicant have sufficient research experience, expertise, level of independence and scientific network for implementation of the proposed project?
• How does the applicant’s academic qualifications and achievements relate to his or her career stage and active time for research?
• Does the applicant have a documented independent line of investigation?
• Does the publication record suggest a coherent line of investigation? Does the applicant report publications as senior author? Focus is on the most relevant and important publications and reports, with emphasis on quality rather than quantity.

Especially for Starting Grants:

• Has the applicant shown the ability to work independently of former advisors?
• Has the applicant shown the ability to work in new (international) research environments, for instance during postdoctoral work?

Feasibility (1–3)

Guiding questions:

• Considering the project as a whole, including any participating researchers, does the applicant or project group have sufficient competence needed for completion of the project?
• Is the general design, including the time frame, realistic for implementing the proposed project?
• Are the materials, methods, experimental models, and when appropriate, patient cohorts adequate and well adapted to the hypothesis or research question?

Overall grade (1–7)

The above subsidiary criteria are weighed together into an overall grade, which reflects the review panel’s joint evaluation of the application’s scientific quality.

Additional criterion for relevance in project grant 3R (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Is this a strategically important 3Rs area?
• Will the proposal replace/reduce animal use by a significant number of animals?
• Will the proposal refine a severe/moderate procedure (even if the number of animals affected is low) OR refine a mild procedure where animal numbers are high?
• Could the outcomes be applicable to other models/research areas?