Evidence-Based Practice EBP 3624 review, 2 to 3 minutes
Building a Fundable Proposal
The idea
The technique: turn a designed study into a proposal that gets funded, which is a different skill from designing the study and is where most good projects stop.
In practice
The study from the previous video needs money. Finding the match comes first: the agency whose interests fit the question, identified by asking the agency directly and by reading what it has already funded, which is public. Then the abstract, which carries the proposal — reviewers form a view there and the rest confirms it. It has to establish clinical significance, and the so-what factor is stated in terms someone outside the specialty feels: cost, length of stay, preventable complications. Innovation, aims and framework follow, then the approach to analysis. The full proposal names the specific aims, the problem and the prior work, and the gap — explicitly, because a reviewer should not have to infer what is missing. Who is doing it, the design, ethics approval, methods, collection, analysis, and a budget that matches the work proposed. Limitations are stated rather than hidden, since a reviewer who finds an unstated limitation stops trusting the rest. And the four common failures are avoided by design: too much work proposed, a weak analysis plan, no connection to the literature, and promising either too much or too little.
Where people slip
Most proposals are not funded first time, and rejection is not a verdict on the project. Feedback is usually available and reviewers are followed explicitly on resubmission, which is a different act from starting over. Following them explicitly means naming each comment and saying what changed in response, including the ones you disagreed with and declined to act on, with the reason. A resubmission that quietly ignores a reviewer teaches them nothing has changed.
Your place on the trail
Every lesson rests on earlier ones and opens later ones. Tap any to jump.
Builds on
- 3301Evidence Costs Money
- 3303Find the Match First
- 3305Look at What Was Funded
- 3306The Abstract Carries the Proposal
- 3307Abstract — Clinical Significance
- 3308The So-What Factor
- 3312What a Proposal Contains
- 3313Specific Aims
- 3315Name the Gap
- 3320The Budget
- 3321State the Limitations
- 3322Failure — Too Much Work Proposed
- 3323Failure — Weak Analysis Plan
- 3324Failure — Not Connected to the Literature
- 3325Failure — Promising Too Much or Too Little
- 3327Follow the Reviewers Explicitly
Unlocks
- Nothing yet depends on this.
Something wrong in this lesson? Flag it · Sources for Evidence-Based Practice