4.2 Article

How to write a successful grant application: guidance provided by the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Volume 45, Issue 3, Pages 781-786

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11096-023-01543-7

Keywords

Clinical pharmacy; Economics; Funding; Grants; Peer review; Writing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Writing a research grant proposal is a daunting task with a high rejection rate. This article summarizes the key points for researchers to consider, including conceptualizing the research idea, finding the right funding call, planning, writing, and reflection during preparation. It aims to assist both new and experienced researchers in improving their grant review scores and is part of ESCP's commitment to stimulate innovative research in clinical pharmacy.
Considering a rejection rate of 80-90%, the preparation of a research grant is often considered a daunting task since it is resource intensive and there is no guarantee of success, even for seasoned researchers. This commentary provides a summary of the key points a researcher needs to consider when writing a research grant proposal, outlining: (1) how to conceptualise the research idea; (2) how to find the right funding call; (3) the importance of planning; (4) how to write; (5) what to write, and (6) key questions for reflection during preparation. It attempts to explain the difficulties associated with finding calls in clinical pharmacy and advanced pharmacy practice, and how to overcome them. The commentary aims to assist all pharmacy practice and health services research colleagues new to the grant application process, as well as experienced researchers striving to improve their grant review scores. The guidance in this paper is part of ESCP's commitment to stimulate innovative and high-quality research in all areas of clinical pharmacy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available