m********3
发帖数: 38 | 1 大学里的Research Scientist是个什么职位啊？能独立能申请NIH grant吗？这个和
instructor 有什么区别？麻烦有知情人解答。多谢！ | s******y
发帖数: 28562 | 2 不同学校不一样，有的学校可以，有的学校不可以。
但是，一般而言，很难拿到R01,
【在 m********3 的大作中提到】
: 大学里的Research Scientist是个什么职位啊？能独立能申请NIH grant吗？这个和
: instructor 有什么区别？麻烦有知情人解答。多谢！
| m********3
发帖数: 38 | 3 Many thanks, Sunnyday! 能申请grant的话，也是先从R21开始了。：） | d***y
发帖数: 8536 | 4 申请支持career的比较好。正常的grant 会认为学校支持力度不够之类的原因不给的。 | A******y
发帖数: 2041 | 5 No, R01 is easier than R21.
【在 m********3 的大作中提到】
: Many thanks, Sunnyday! 能申请grant的话，也是先从R21开始了。：）
| l********g
发帖数: 400 | 6 哈哈, 请问为何还有这么多人投 R21? 这些人怕钱太多,还是他们都是傻瓜?
【在 A******y 的大作中提到】
: No, R01 is easier than R21.
| A******y
发帖数: 2041 | 7 傻瓜! I know new investigators submit R21 when the PO told them not to in
their face and they argue with the PO. If they are not idiots, what are
they? | l********g
发帖数: 400 | 8 NIH 每年收到一万多份的 R21 application.
这一万多的 scientists 都是傻瓜? 还是把这一万多人当傻瓜的人自己是傻瓜?
【在 A******y 的大作中提到】
: 傻瓜! I know new investigators submit R21 when the PO told them not to in
: their face and they argue with the PO. If they are not idiots, what are
: they?
| A******y
发帖数: 2041 | 9 Read carefully. If you are new investigators, you apply for R21 that is not
an RFA stating for new investigators, you are likely an idiot. You are
exactly like people in conferences arguing with NIH POs that telling them
not to apply for R21. R21s are for establish investigators and are harder
to get. Does your institute hired retired NIH POs to teach you on
grantsmanship, you should go ask him/her.
Btw, feel free to apply R21, less competition for me.
【在 l********g 的大作中提到】
: NIH 每年收到一万多份的 R21 application.
: 这一万多的 scientists 都是傻瓜? 还是把这一万多人当傻瓜的人自己是傻瓜?
| l********g
发帖数: 400 | 10 If you are new investigators, you apply for R21 that is not
an RFA stating for new investigators, you are likely an idiot.
我不是 new investigator,尽管我也申请 R21,我没资格被你称为 idiot.
R21s are for establish investigators and are harder to get.
请教一下, 既然 R21 更难拿, 为何establish investigator 就应该申请 R21?
Does your institute hired retired NIH POs to teach you on grantsmanship, you
should go ask him/her.
并不是每个学校都有 retired NIH PO,他们不是照样拿 RO1,R21, 也不一定比你们拿得
少. 有问题我们都是去问还没有 retired NIH PO.
not
【在 A******y 的大作中提到】
: Read carefully. If you are new investigators, you apply for R21 that is not
: an RFA stating for new investigators, you are likely an idiot. You are
: exactly like people in conferences arguing with NIH POs that telling them
: not to apply for R21. R21s are for establish investigators and are harder
: to get. Does your institute hired retired NIH POs to teach you on
: grantsmanship, you should go ask him/her.
: Btw, feel free to apply R21, less competition for me.
| | | A******y
发帖数: 2041 | 11 Even if you are an established PI, you should get R01 instead of R21 (but go
ahead and apply for R21). The poster of this topic is clearly a new
investigator.
Also, my former post-doctoral PI said the greatest mistake that he ever did
was to apply a R21 instead using the same grant for an R01. I'm no body,
but he has 3 R01, a DoD, and 1 R21 when I was in his lab. He said the R21
can easily be funded as an R01 a 5 year grant instead of 2 none renewable
one.
you
【在 l********g 的大作中提到】
: If you are new investigators, you apply for R21 that is not
: an RFA stating for new investigators, you are likely an idiot.
: 我不是 new investigator,尽管我也申请 R21,我没资格被你称为 idiot.
: R21s are for establish investigators and are harder to get.
: 请教一下, 既然 R21 更难拿, 为何establish investigator 就应该申请 R21?
: Does your institute hired retired NIH POs to teach you on grantsmanship, you
: should go ask him/her.
: 并不是每个学校都有 retired NIH PO,他们不是照样拿 RO1,R21, 也不一定比你们拿得
: 少. 有问题我们都是去问还没有 retired NIH PO.
:
| T**********y
发帖数: 559 | 12 我发几句言，最近刚中了个R21, 应该具有借鉴意义：
1. University scientist能否申请R21, to my understanding, NIH does not care
much, as long as your institution likes to define you as an Principal
Investigator Role or Status (PI), which will allow you to create an account
in eRA. This is the first of all. Certainly, your background and experience
will be judged by study section, which will impact your final score.
2. 就R01和R21那个难；我在申请的时候听到了太多这样的argue, 搞得我当时都晕了。
个人总结：这个问题很难统一回答，取决于申请人的职位／状态。
If you are already independent and have your own lab, then for sure, go with
RO1, definitely not R21; but if you are not totally independent yet, for
example, research scientist/staff scientist/RAP in a big lab, I would think
R21 could be a good choice. 当然前提还是你的proposal要一样的competitive. 原
因有：1) R21 applicant pool is different; 虽然说是R21面对established PI, 但
实际上大部分PI还是不申请R21的，起码我们领域是这样；2）for current funding
climate, study section和说过，很难想象把一个5年的>1 million grant给一个还没
完全独立的scientist.其实这些在study section讨论给你overall impact score的时
候都考虑的。给个<0.5 million给个刚起步的scientist, less risky. 当然我同意，
如果有好的背景／data, big K award (K99) might be better than R21. | l********g
发帖数: 400 | 13
go
同意. 我送的 RO1 也比 R21 多, 但这是因为 R01 钱多,而不是因为 RO1 更容易拿.
【在 A******y 的大作中提到】
: Even if you are an established PI, you should get R01 instead of R21 (but go
: ahead and apply for R21). The poster of this topic is clearly a new
: investigator.
: Also, my former post-doctoral PI said the greatest mistake that he ever did
: was to apply a R21 instead using the same grant for an R01. I'm no body,
: but he has 3 R01, a DoD, and 1 R21 when I was in his lab. He said the R21
: can easily be funded as an R01 a 5 year grant instead of 2 none renewable
: one.
:
: you
| l********g
发帖数: 400 | 14 赞!
个人总结：这个问题很难统一回答，取决于申请人的职位／状态。
If you are already independent and have your own lab, then for sure, go with
RO1, definitely not R21; but if you are not totally independent yet, for
example, research scientist/staff scientist/RAP in a big lab, I would think
R21 could be a good choice. 当然前提还是你的proposal要一样的competitive. 原
因有：1) R21 applicant pool is different; 虽然说是R21面对established PI, 但
实际上大部分PI还是不申请R21的，起码我们领域是这样；2）for current funding
climate, study section和说过，很难想象把一个5年的>1 million grant给一个还没
完全独立的scientist.其实这些在study section讨论给你overall impact score的时
候都考虑的。给个<0.5 million给个刚起步的scientist, less risky. 当然我同意，
如果有好的背景／data, big K award (K99) might be better than R21.
【在 T**********y 的大作中提到】
: 我发几句言，最近刚中了个R21, 应该具有借鉴意义：
: 1. University scientist能否申请R21, to my understanding, NIH does not care
: much, as long as your institution likes to define you as an Principal
: Investigator Role or Status (PI), which will allow you to create an account
: in eRA. This is the first of all. Certainly, your background and experience
: will be judged by study section, which will impact your final score.
: 2. 就R01和R21那个难；我在申请的时候听到了太多这样的argue, 搞得我当时都晕了。
: 个人总结：这个问题很难统一回答，取决于申请人的职位／状态。
: If you are already independent and have your own lab, then for sure, go with
: RO1, definitely not R21; but if you are not totally independent yet, for
| v***l
发帖数: 2623 | 15 你们居然这都能吵起来。每个所也不一样啊。我们交的所确实是一而再再而三的在各种
workskhop提醒大家，new investigator不要交R21。 | h****u
发帖数: 618 | 16 R01 需要很多数据,据说要一半的数据都做出来了.请问是这样吗？R21数据可以相对少
一些吧。我觉得对于new investigator,R01还是R21取决于数据够不够吧。我知道有new
investigator拿到R21的。 | p*l
发帖数: 1359 | 17 R21其实要的数据不见的比R01少，对新人来说确实比较难拿到，按统计来说平均投入产
出比低。不过实际例还得实际分析。
我R21和R01都投都拿到了，R21还比R01早。虽然有时候可惜，如果那个R21当时投成R01
，我就有两个R01了，但是这只是想得美而已。我的R01是个工作量大，数据多的方向，
自觉可以靠这个吃十年的饭。R21的方向有点抓眼球，但是我当时只看得到眼前几年的
工作，以后怎样还没想法。所以那个R21，如果硬撑着吹成个R01估计反而要糟糕。
我觉得对新人来说，主打项目要申R01，如果有闲情逸致，副业项目试试R21也不错。 | l***s
发帖数: 841 | 18 对于独立的新PI来说可写的研究方向就不多，拿去写R21还是挺可惜的。还是应该主攻
R01. 我都是把failed的R01改包成R21，反正不试白不试，死马当活马医了。对于非独
立的research faculty，R21是较好的第一选择， 如Tony所言。我一个朋友就是这样发
家的，最终在系里拿到了独立的位置。 | k****o
发帖数: 728 | 19 搭车问一下，申请这些grant，需要是permanent resident吗？
还有，哪里有科普这些R,K类别grant的地方？
【在 m********3 的大作中提到】
: 大学里的Research Scientist是个什么职位啊？能独立能申请NIH grant吗？这个和
: instructor 有什么区别？麻烦有知情人解答。多谢！
| v***l
发帖数: 2623 | 20 只有K grant需要绿卡（除了k99不要）。
不要偷懒，花个一天时间到NIH网站上挨个funding mechanism读一遍，所有信息在上面
写的清清楚楚。 |
|
