Selecting a research project

[Scaeland]

Hello SDN,

I'm an MD/PhD student currently rising into my MS2 year. I have extensive research experience (4 years of undergrad plus 1 year of a masters followed by 2 years working as a research engineer in my field) and am interested in submitting an F30 application before the end of MS2. I'd like to try to start in my lab with my own funding because my PI is a young investigator and has not yet accrued much funding. Additionally, if not successful, I will have the comments back and the ability to edit and resubmit before the end of 2015 if I submit round 1 before the end of 2014. My question is how important is the project and description in the application? I ask because I do not yet have a great idea of what my thesis work will be on. My advisor, as a new investigator, has given me a long leash in terms of developing my own project. I am comfortable with developing my own project but unfortunately the lab doesn't have a backbone of thrusts on which I can construct a project from. I'm hoping someone can elaborate a bit on advice concerning how to go about project design without seeming like a rogue scientist who has no idea what he's doing. I should add that I have a co-mentor within my PIs department who has a strong funding history but whose lab focuses on topics that are peripherally related to my central foci.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[URHere]

How much time have you spent in this lab so far? Are you going to spend time there during MS2 year? I ask because there is significant risk in applying for a grant if you are too new to your field of research. Do you understand the literature in your field? Can you compare/contrast relevant techniques? Do you have preliminary data?

You will not only need to have a great idea for a project, you will need to prove that you are the best researcher to carry out that research. Understanding the background literature keeps you from making a fool of yourself, but I think that preliminary data is the best way to make people believe that you know what you're talking about. I would say that you need to identify a project and run a few preliminary experiments before you even think about sending in a grant for review.

With respect to choosing a project - try to pick something that is well-suited to both you and your lab. A big part of your grant will be convincing your reviewers that you have access to tools or expertise that others do not. If you can find a project that combines your PI's expertise with the things you've learned over your research career, you have a better shot at being successful. Good luck.

 

[Scaeland]

Hi and thanks for your response. I have spent a month in this lab so far. As I indicated, however, I have 7 years of research experience in my field (2 of which were spent as a professional researcher with no other duties). I have a very good command of the literature in my field and have learned many of the cutting edge lab techniques. As for preliminary data I have a lot but seeing as how I am not yet decided on a project I am not sure if the data will be useful/relevant. My background in the field is strong - my former boss is the editor-in-chief of one of the most respected journals in the field and his name is widely known. His mentorship has made me a strong researcher in the field. I can develop a solid set of aims and hypotheses on a number of projects but am reluctant to because I am not certain what direction I will be taking my thesis work. I suppose another way to ask my question is does your thesis work have to reflect your proposal in the grant application or is there room for some change?

 

[chutzpah]

Just a word a warning, read the FOA. They're highly recommending that you finish your quals/prelim exam and start your thesis work prior to submitting. I'm currently in the process of submitting an F30 and I think while the research is important, stressing how the project will help you develop as a future physician scientist plays a much more important role (it is a training grant after all).

 

[bd4727]

You need to have very clearly defined specific aims, which it doesn't sound like you have yet. You also need to demonstrate through either preliminary data or recent publications from you lab, that you will have the ability to carry out the experiments that you propose. From my experience submitting and then revising, you need to be incredibly detailed about exactly what it is you plan to do, and also do have this be reasonable for STUDENT to accomplish, as I was initially knocked pretty heavily for proposing to do too much.

While the research proposal is technically only 25% for the F30, in my experience the majority of people are all very strong in the other 3 main categories, and therefore the research proposal really is everything when it comes to trying to make it above the payline. From what you have written, I would suggest making a much more concerted effort to clearly and narrowly define the specific hypothesis you want to test, the two aims you will use to test that hypothesis, and the actual methods you will employ within each of those aims. If you have prelim data to back these methods and/or hypothesis up, all the better (some would say this is not required, but probably very debatable).

Also, having a famous PI helps a lot. Make sure their letter about you and their ability to train students is long, thorough, and personal to your training plan.

 

[Petypet]

My advisor, as a new investigator, has given me a long leash in terms of developing my own project. I am comfortable with developing my own project but unfortunately the lab doesn't have a backbone of thrusts on which I can construct a project from. I'm hoping someone can elaborate a bit on advice concerning how to go about project design without seeming like a rogue scientist who has no idea what he's doing. I should add that I have a co-mentor within my PIs department who has a strong funding history but whose lab focuses on topics that are peripherally related to my central foci.

Tread carefully. New faculty are great at being "cooler" and more liberal, but this may not be in the student's best interest. Generally students when coming up with projects greatly overestimate the feasibility of a project and underestimate the costs. Especially with a young faculty, your goal is to get a thesis and some publications. If you shotgun a new idea without any previous research/data, you are asking for a year or two of stalemated research (and possibly having to redo the whole process because of failed experiments). Like BD4727 said you need prelim data. Experience and knowledge isn't enough when it comes to getting funded, you need data to support your claims.

This is my personal opinion, and probably not worth much, but I would build off a current project of your PIs. If you can get a small result, you have a path to propose future research. You mentioned your lab doesn't have a backbone to build a project off of. Certainly your mentor had to have projects in mind when he was hired. For your first year or so, it is really HIS responsibility to come up with the projects so that you can get data, and this should be irrespective of your previous experiences.

You will spend a lot of time writing an F30 (especially if its a novel idea with no previous lab experiences and ata), and will be competing with very established research labs. Keep in mind that these grants aren't for lab costs, and if you propose stuff without knowing that your lab can complete said experiments, you are setting yourself up for a headache.

 

[Scaeland]

Thank you all for your valuable input. I will spend much more time with my PI and committee to hammer out a detailed series of hypotheses and corresponding experiments prior to drafting the research proposal aspect of the grant. Your insight is much appreciated.