Academic literature on the topic 'Grant proposal editing'

A one-credit course, Writing in Horticulture, was developed and taught to graduate students in the Dept. of Horticulture at Clemson Univ. The course focused on discussion and explanation of the philosophies and methods of writing in the horticulture field. Discussions included a review of writing mechanics, types of writing and audiences, examples of exemplary writings, editing and reviewing, and examples and methods of professional correspondence. Real-life writing experiences were emphasized. Hands-on activities included writing and reviewing peer manuscripts and grant proposals. Three original written works were completed by the end of the semester: 1) a popular press article, 2) a grant proposal (maximum three pages long), and 3) an abstract for a manuscript published previously in a scientific journal.

Abstract Background The need for consistent academic productivity challenges junior clinician-scholars, who often lack the aptitude to ensure efficient production of manuscripts. Intervention To solve this problem, an academic division of a major medical center developed an off-site writing retreat. The purpose of the retreat was not to teach writing skills, but to offer senior mentor assistance with a focus on the elements of manuscript writing. Methods The retreat paired senior faculty members with junior staff. Senior faculty identified manuscript topics and provided real-time writing and editing supervision. Team-building exercises, midcourse corrections, and debriefing interviews were built into the retreat. The number of manuscripts and grant proposals generated during the 2008–2011 retreats was recorded, and the program was evaluated by using unstructured debriefing interviews. Results An average of 6 to 7 faculty members and fellows participated in each retreat. During the past 4 years, participants produced an average of 3 grant proposals and 7 manuscripts per retreat. After the writing retreat, each fellow and junior faculty member produced an average of 4 scholarly products per year, compared to fewer than 2 for prior years' retreats. Participant feedback indicated the success of the retreat resulted from protected time, direct mentorship by the scholars involved, and pairing of authors, which allows for rapid production of manuscripts and accelerated the editing process. More than 80% of mentors returned each year to participate. Conclusions The writing retreat is a feasible, effective strategy to increase scholarship among faculty, acceptable to mentees and mentors, and sustainable over time.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Translational researchers often require the use of informatics methods in their work. Lack of an understanding of key informatics principles and methods limits the abilities of translational researchers to successfully implement Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) principles in grant proposal submissions and performed studies. In this study we describe our work in addressing this limitation in the workforce by developing a competency-based, modular course in informatics to meet the needs of diverse translational researchers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We established a Translational Research Informatics Education Collaborative (TRIEC) consisting of faculty at the University of Utah (UU) with different primary expertise in informatics methods, and working in different tiers of the translational spectrum. The TRIEC, in collaboration with the Foundation of Workforce Development of the Utah Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS), gathered informatics needs of early investigators by consolidating requests for informatics services, assistance provided in grant writing, and consultations. We then reviewed existing courses and literature for informatics courses that focused on clinical and translational researchers [3–9]. Using the structure and content of the identified courses, we developed an initial draft of a syllabus for a Translational Research Informatics (TRI) course which included key informatics topics to be covered and learning activities, and iteratively refined it through discussions. The course was approved by the UU Department of Biomedical Informatics, UU Graduate School and the CCTS. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The TRI course introduces informatics PhD students, clinicians, and public health practitioners who have a demonstrated interest in research, to fundamental principles and tools of informatics. At the completion of the course, students will be able to describe and identify informatics tools and methods relevant to translational research and demonstrate inter-professional collaboration in the development of a research proposal addressing a relevant translational science question that utilizes the state-of-the-art in informatics. TRI covers a diverse set of informatics content presented as modules: genomics and bioinformatics, electronic health records, exposomics, microbiomics, molecular methods, data integration and fusion, metadata management, semantics, software architectures, mobile computing, sensors, recruitment, community engagement, secure computing environments, data mining, machine learning, deep learning, artificial intelligence and data science, open source informatics tools and platforms, research reproducibility, and uncertainty quantification. The teaching methods for TRI include (1) modular didactic learning consisting of presentations and readings and face-to-face discussions of the content, (2) student presentations of informatics literature relevant to their final project, and (3) a final project consisting of the development, critique and chalk talk and formal presentations of informatics methods and/or aims of an National Institutes of Health style K or R grant proposal. For (3), the student presents their translational research proposal concept at the beginning of the course, and works with members of the TRIEC with corresponding expertise. The final course grade is a combination of the final project, paper presentations and class participation. We offered TRI to a first cohort of students in the Fall semester of 2018. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Translational research informatics is a sub-domain of biomedical informatics that applies and develops informatics theory and methods for translational research. TRI covers a diverse set of informatics topics that are applicable across the translational spectrum. It covers both didactic material and hands-on experience in using the material in grant proposals and research studies. TRI’s course content, teaching methodology and learning activities enable students to initially learn factual informatics knowledge and skills for translational research correspond to the ‘Remember, Understand, and Apply’ levels of the Bloom’s taxonomy [10]. The final project provides opportunity for applying these informatics concepts corresponding to the ‘Analyze, Evaluate, and Create’ levels of the Bloom’s taxonomy [10]. This inter-professional, competency-based, modular course will develop an informatics-enabled workforce trained in using state-of-the-art informatics solutions, increasing the effectiveness of translational science and precision medicine, and promoting FAIR principles in research data management and processes. Future work includes opening the course to all Clinical and Translational Science Award hubs and publishing the course material as a reference book. While student evaluations for the first cohort will be available end of the semester, true evaluation of TRI will be the number of trainees taking the course and successful grant proposal submissions. References: 1. Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016 Mar 15. 2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Translational Science Spectrum. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. 2015 [cited 2018 Nov 15]. Available from: https://ncats.nih.gov/translation/spectrum 3. Hu H, Mural RJ, Liebman MN. Biomedical Informatics in Translational Research. 1 edition. Boston: Artech House; 2008. 264 p. 4. Payne PRO, Embi PJ, Niland J. Foundational biomedical informatics research in the clinical and translational science era: a call to action. J Am Med Inform Assoc JAMIA. 2010;17(6):615–6. 5. Payne PRO, Embi PJ, editors. Translational Informatics: Realizing the Promise of Knowledge-Driven Healthcare. Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 2015 edition. Springer; 2016. 196 p. 6. Richesson R, Andrews J, editors. Clinical Research Informatics. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing; 2019. (Health Informatics). 7. Robertson D, MD GHW, editors. Clinical and Translational Science: Principles of Human Research. 2 edition. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2017. 808 p. 8. Shen B, Tang H, Jiang X, editors. Translational Biomedical Informatics: A Precision Medicine Perspective. Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 2016 edition. S.l.: Springer; 2018. 340 p. 9. Valenta AL, Meagher EA, Tachinardi U, Starren J. Core informatics competencies for clinical and translational scientists: what do our customers and collaborators need to know? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Jul 1;23(4):835–9. 10. Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Airasian PW, Cruikshank KA, Mayer RE, Pintrich PR, Raths J, Wittrock MC. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Abridged Edition. 1 edition. New York: Pearson; 2000.

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich (the august poet K. R.) were linked by many years of friendship and creative cooperation. After the composer’s death (October 25, 1893), K. R. became involved in the process of perpetuating his memory. The posthumous dialogue was manifested in various forms: Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich’s participation in church and secular memorial ceremonies, private commemorations, and his close communication with M.I. Tchaikovsky and V.L. Davydov — the composer’s brother and nephew. In addition, K. R. reexamined his creative and epistolary communication with the composer, whose memory he would pass on to his children. These and other aspects are considered in three sections of the proposed article: 1) “Under the Sign of the Liturgy Op. 41” (this spiritual and musical work runs through the whole life of the Grand Duke); 2) “The Grand Duke and M.I. Tchaikovsky” (a key figure in the “human” aspect); 3) “K. R. Reads ‘The Life of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky’” (one of the most important findings was a copy of the book ‘The Life of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky’, which belonged to Grand Duke and bears his notes; they retrospectively reflect the process of in-depth family reading). The article is based on documentary materials from Russian and foreign collections (including the State Archive of the Russian Federation and the Library of Congress, USA), many of which are introduced into scientific use for the first time. The article uses methods of comparative source studies. The materials of the article can be used in a course of the history of Russian music, as well as in a modern commented edition of the epistolary heritage and diaries of P.I. Tchaikovsky, M.I. Tchaikovsky and Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich.

The scientific activity of the state archives has been visibly regressing for several years and it has been regarded critically by the archival community. The article outlines the current state of scientific activity of the state archives. The most important problem areas requiring in-depth analysis and a discussion within the archival community have been proposed. The author presented the priority research needs of contemporary archivistics, in which scientific research is essential for the further development of archives. These are: contemporary electronic office and methods of shaping the documents accrual (management of large archival data sets, metadata standards, creation of information retrieval models, selection and evaluation of electronic and mixed documentation, issues of permanent storage of documents created in electronic and hybrid documentation systems); institutional development of state archives (IT systems for fonds management), smart buildings systems for archival buildings, modern methods of preventive maintenance and conservation; archival methodology (boundaries and research tools of contemporary archival methodology, taking into account the diversity of forms and types of documentation). Moreover, the need to undertake interdisciplinary research in the field of digital humanities was indicated, as well as to develop a modern dictionary of terminology of archival science and works developing the principles of editing 20th and 21st century archival sources, taking into account their new digital and Internet forms. Proposals of preferred organizational solutions in the area of scientific activity of archives were discussed, taking into account the new organization of science in Poland resulting from the 2018 reform: establishment of an archival school and a system of academic grants in cooperation with the Association of Polish Archivists.

Adopting effective techniques to automatically detect and identify small drones is a very compelling need for a number of different stakeholders in both the public and private sectors. This work presents three different original approaches that competed in a grand challenge on the “Drone vs. Bird” detection problem. The goal is to detect one or more drones appearing at some time point in video sequences where birds and other distractor objects may be also present, together with motion in background or foreground. Algorithms should raise an alarm and provide a position estimate only when a drone is present, while not issuing alarms on birds, nor being confused by the rest of the scene. In particular, three original approaches based on different deep learning strategies are proposed and compared on a real-world dataset provided by a consortium of universities and research centers, under the 2020 edition of the Drone vs. Bird Detection Challenge. Results show that there is a range in difficulty among different test sequences, depending on the size and the shape visibility of the drone in the sequence, while sequences recorded by a moving camera and very distant drones are the most challenging ones. The performance comparison reveals that the different approaches perform somewhat complementary, in terms of correct detection rate, false alarm rate, and average precision.

Uffe Hansen 14.12. 1894 - 11.9. 1994By Henning HøirupThe obituary begins with a description of Uffe Hansen’s background as an Independent Congregation clergyman (from 1925) to the Grundtvigian Independent Congregation (Danish valgmenighed, i.e. a congregation within the National Church, claiming the right to employ their own minister) of Ubberup, where the prominent clergymen V.J.Hoff and Carl Koch were his predecessors. Carl Koch’s extensive writings, theologically erudite, but .popular. in their language, and thus accessible to the layman, were to become the model for Uffe Hansen’s studies in Grundtvig’s hymnwriting. Through his membership of the Hymn Book Commission of the free Grundtvigian congregations (HYMNS. Independent Congregations and Free Church Congregations, 1935), Uffe Hansen was motivated to realize his plan of a complete account of the whole of Grundtvig’s hymn writing in the book Grundtvig’s Hymn Writing. Its History and Content I. 1810-1837, published in 1937. In the following years Uffe Hansen was absorbed in organizational work (Grundtvigian Convent, the »No More War« organization) and by his membership of the Grundtvigian Hymn Book Committee (The Danish Hymn Book. A Grundtvigian Proposal, 1944). In the 1940s efforts were made to unite the hymn tradition of the re-united Southern Jutland with the traditions of the Kingdom, i.e. the old Danish treasury of hymns and the Grundtvigian hymns. Uffe Hansen became a member of the Hymn Book Commission which published the proposal The Danish Hymn Book in 1951. More than anybody else, Uffe Hansen is responsible for the large number of Grundtvig hymns in this proposal, often with verses from the original versions of the hymns added to them. In spite of vehement criticism on this point The Danish Hymn Book was authorized in 1953. Grundtvig remained the predominant contributor, even though significant Grundtvig hymns, expressing his church view, were omitted, much to Uffe Hansen’s regret. The Hymn Book includes Uffe Hansen’s own translation of the Latin antiphone Oh, Grant Us Peace, Our Lord. While this debate was going on, the continuation of Uffe Hansen’s work, Grundtvig9s Hymn Writing II. 1837-1850 appeared in 1951, an important contribution to a comprehensive interpretation of Grundtvig’s work to renew the Danish hymnody. However, Uffe Hansen’s main achievement as a hymn researcher was his work as a co-editor of Grundtvig’s Song-Work I-VI, 1944-1964. This new edition was worked out on scientific principles, and the hymns were brought in chronological order, as far as it was possible. The edition included a critical variant apparatus, compiled by Uffe Hansen. Concurrently with this work, Uffe Hansen participated in the compilation of a Register of Grundtvig’s Posthumous Papers 1-IXXX, 1956-1964, and, while engaged on this, found several hitherto unknown hymns, which were included in the new edition of the Song-Work.Here Uffe Hansen’s abilities as a researcher and scholar were amply demonstrated. Then, in 1966, came his finalwork, Grundtvig’s Hymn Writing III. 1851-1872, which, like the other volumes, testify to Uffe Hansen’s talent for combining erudition with easy comprehensibility. In his last years Uffe Hansen lived in Holland; he was laid to rest from the Independent Congregation Church of Ubberup.

This volume has been many years in the making. I first discovered examples of wives and husbands suing each other in Requests in 1989 while pursuing doctoral research. Pat Stretton and Jane Martindale independently suggested that the cases were worthy of publication, and Jane helped to bring this idea to the attention of the literary editors of the Royal Historical Society. I thank them both. Since then the editors of the Camden Series, Andrew Pettegree and Ian Archer, have provided support and shown unstinting patience for a project that has seasonally burst the banks of its projected deadlines. I am grateful to them, to the anonymous reviewer of the original proposal for pointing out the need to determine the frequency with which cases of this type came into Requests, and to the National Archives for permitting the cases to be reproduced. For financial support I wish to acknowledge the generosity of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, grant-giving bodies within Waikato University, Dalhousie University, and Saint Mary's University, and Lyndan Warner. A number of scholars, archivists, and friends have provided advice as well as technical help in identifying legal counsel, deciphering handwriting, and translating Latin abbreviations. I would like to thank Christopher Brooks, Sara Butler, Sabina Flannagan, Elizabeth Foyster, Lamar Hill, Martin Holt, Wilfrid Prest, and the helpful staff at the National Archives, especially Amanda Bevan, Sean Cunningham, Alistair Hanson, and Malcolm Mercer. All of them are absolved of responsibility for any of the errors that remain. For the generosity of their hospitality during the compiling and editing of this volume, I would like to offer my gratitude to Gareth Edwards, Frances Wedgwood, Nick Manglaras, Francesca Amirato, and the Tewsons. Final thanks go to Lyndan Warner, for her support, her comments on the introduction, and her willingness to look after our children while I made annual visits to London and Kew.

: Although cross-correction was discovered more than 50 years ago, and held the promise of drastically improving disease management, still no cure exists for lysosomal storage diseases (LSDs). Cell therapies hold the potential to halt disease progression: either a subset of autologous cells can be ex vivo/ in vivo transfected with the functional gene or allogenic wild type stem cells can be transplanted. However, majority of cell-based attempts have been ineffective, due to the difficulties in reversing neuronal symptomatology, in finding appropriate gene transfection approaches, in inducing immune tolerance, reducing the risk of graft versus host disease (GVHD) when allogenic cells are used and that of immune response when engineered viruses are administered, coupled with a limited secretion and uptake of some enzymes. In the last decade, due to advances in our understanding of lysosomal biology and mechanisms of cross-correction, coupled with progresses in gene therapy, ongoing pre-clinical and clinical investigations have remarkably increased. Even gene editing approaches are currently under clinical experimentation. This review proposes to critically discuss and compare trends and advances in cell-based and gene therapy for LSDs. Systemic gene delivery and transplantation of allogenic stem cells will be initially discussed, whereas proposed brain targeting methods will be then critically outlined.

abstract: This project presents a mixed methods analysis of proposal editing in sponsored research administration at U.S.-based universities. As sponsored research funding has become increasingly competitive, universities have sought to support their faculty and research infrastructure by offering proposal editing services as a component of the proposal development process. However, the relative newness of proposal and research development as fields, combined with prior studies that show a general lack of research into proposal editing and faculty perceptions of proposal development resources, mean that these areas can benefit from additional focused research. This study aimed to answer two primary research questions: How do universities approach and offer proposal editing as a component of the proposal development process, and what are faculty reactions to editing services as a resource during that same process? The study consisted of two components: a survey of 32 faculty members' perceptions of editing services as an element of their proposal development, and interviews with ten research administrators and editors to discuss how editing services function within the proposal preparation process. Despite a small sample size and disciplinary homogeneity, the survey results showed that demand for institutionally provided editing services varies by research field and activity level, but that faculty showed noticeable interest in at least having the option of an editor reviewing their proposals prior to submission. Interview participants agreed that faculty who are new or early in their careers, along with faculty who speak English as a second language, are especially interested in receiving editing services. Editors themselves provide various levels of edit, dependent on their own backgrounds, editing timelines, and faculty receptiveness to the edits. When provided, edits focus on compliance and grammar, but deeper edits help academic styles of writing transition into more persuasive grant writing styles to strategically position the proposal. As proposal editing services become more widespread as a way of supporting faculty and increasingly proposal quality and success, universities should implement editing services according to faculty demand and needs. Careful implementation can ensure that editing services fully support faculty while making a meaningful impact on a university's research development strategies and goals.
Dissertation/Thesis
Masters Thesis Technical Communication 2019