198 M.V. Brock

shortened grant applications, space is at a premium.

Beware that not all reviewers read the appendix thoroughly, but rather glance at it as a reference. So, keep all essential documentation that you would really like the reviewers to see out of the appendix

23.Pay close attention to recruitment and retention details of any proposed clinical trial. In your recruitment of minority or foreign subjects, do you have a plan to use a patient navigator or study coordinator who can speak the requisite foreign language?

24.Ensure that you have a control arm for your clinical studies. Make sure that all bench experiments have appropriate controls.

25.Leverage the NIH’s funding by taking any opportunity to link your study to existing NIH studies especially for cohort recruitment or for testing an assay on a validation cohort.

26.Remember that if your study is a nested study in a larger grant, provide essential details such as characteristics of the sample population, data collection methods etc. Distinguish clearly how your Specific Aims differ from those of the parent grant.

27.Remember to include a data monitoring plan for any intervention, even a behavioral one.

28.One final note is to start the application process months in advance and aim for a completed first draft 1 month before the official due date. This would be helpful to your mentor giving him adequate time for review and comment.

Summary

In contrast to conventional wisdom, the long clinical experience and unique surgical perspectives of even junior level surgeons enable them to be fierce competitors for NIH Career Development Awards. It is incumbent on the young faculty surgeon to seek the proper mentorship, craft a welldesigned course of didactic study, and work together with the

mentor to fashion an innovative research plan. With a welldisciplined approach, surgeons can garner these awards, become excellent, independent translational scientists, and contribute significantly to our understanding of human disease.

Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Dr. Charles Lowenstein for his continued mentorship and permission to print his unpublished thoughts on grant research plans, Dr. Lester Gorelic who served the NIH for many years specializing in administering various types of Career Development Awards, and Josephine Allen for her assistance with the preparation of this chapter.

References

1.NIDDK: Information on Opportunities for Training and Career Development.http://www2.niddk.nih.gov/Funding/TrainingCareerDev/. 2009.

2. Rangel SJ, Moss RL. Recent trends in the funding and utilization of NIH career development awards by surgical faculty. Surgery. 2004;136(2):232-239.

3. McDonagh KT. Identifying grant funding: mentored career development and transition awards. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2008; 12:12-15.

4. Pollock RE, Balch CM. The NIH clinician-investigator award: how to write a training grant application. J Surg Res. 1989;46(1):1-3.

5.The Online Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate® Dictionary. 11th ed. Merriam-Webster, Inc.; 2009.

6.Committee on Science Engineering, and Public Policy, The National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine Adviser. Adviser, Teacher, Role Model, Friend: On Being a Mentor to Students in Science and Engineering.Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1997.

7.Niederhuber JE. Writing a successful grant application. J Surg Res. 1985;39(4):277-284.

202 F.E. Nwariaku

successful research program. We also admit that there are numerous approaches to each of these elements and the recommended approaches delineated here, represent a fraction of available options. Although many of the references described in this chapter relate to bench research, the concepts can be applied broadly to any research program including clinical research programs. This chapter is deliberately written in a broad, informal and somewhat humorous style. The suggestions and recommendations are based on information distilled from multiple sources, while trying to be as practical as possible. As much as possible there are no references to specific techniques, research designs, etc. At the end of the Chapter, there is a suggested reading list which contains useful material from which we have obtained some of this material. It is our hope that the new surgeon-scientist who is starting their scientific career will find this information useful in avoiding the most common pitfalls in setting up their research programs. We hope you enjoy it.

In general most new surgeon-scientists bring tremendous energy to the new program. They possess a valuable skill set including scientific techniques, personal motivation to succeed, and a network of other scientists. However they usually need to learn new methods and establish new professional relationships and take on an increasing clinical and teaching workload. All these factors are crucial to success but can also undermine productivity. As a result it is important to go about the process of setting up your research program deliberately, methodically, and with the end product in mind.

Decisions, Decisions!

It can be overwhelming starting a new research program. The new scientist is often required to make major decisions for which many are poorly prepared. Decisions such as what kind of research personnel should I hire? How much should I pay them? How do I gauge their skill level? Should I share lab space with other investigators? How much should I spend on equipment? and so on. Unfortunately, many new investigators receive