Strategic Training Modules: Building Capacity to Conduct Research Synthesis Regarding Health Services and Policy Research (Archived)
Institute of Health Services and Policy Research
Request for Applications
| Important Dates | |
| Opportunity Launched | December 2005 |
| Content Last Updated | April 10, 2006 (Contact Information) |
| April 1, 2006 | Registration Deadline - Registration packages must be courier stamped by this date |
| May 1, 2006 | Full applications must be courier stamped by this date. |
| December 2006 | Anticipated notification of decision. |
| January 2007 | Anticipated start date. |
| Summary | |
|
Part of CIHR's mandate is to promote research that addresses the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health products and services and a strengthened health care system. The purpose of this Request for Applications (RFA) is to support a minimum of two training initiatives designed to educate health services and policy researchers in methods of conducting syntheses. Funds Available:CIHR's contribution to the amount available for this RFA is subject to availability of funds voted annually to CIHR by parliamentary appropriations, and the conditions that may be attached to them.
| |
Table of Contents
Background
Partners
Objectives and Relevant Research Areas
Eligibility
Allowable Costs
Peer Review Process and Evaluation Criteria
General CIHR Guidelines
Conditions of Funding
Communications Requirements
Monitoring, Performance Measurement and Evaluation
How to Apply
Contact Information
Description of Partners
Background
Each day thousands of citizens, clinicians, healthcare managers and public policy-makers make decisions that influence our health care system and the services received by their fellow Canadians. Health research can and does inform health and health care debate and decision-making, and will continue to do so in the current "evidence-informed decision-making" environment. While decision-making in health care is a complex process, research evidence has an important role to play. It is important that managers and policy-makers have available to them the best available evidence germane to the decisions they make.
Syntheses of all available relevant research form a more robust basis for evidence-informed policy and management decision-making than a single study, ad hoc reviews of literature or expert opinion. Relying on the most recent or well-known study carries several risks including: low statistical power, researcher or expert bias, contextual variability, methodological or theoretical incompleteness, and/or low policy relevance.1 By comparison, research syntheses offer a number of advantages. First, syntheses reduce bias in the estimation of the effectiveness of an intervention, treatment or policy option by identifying all relevant studies, selecting those that meet explicit criteria, appraising their quality and synthesizing the results using a credible, reproducible and transparent process. Second, reviews reduce the role that chance has to play in estimating effectiveness or cost-effectiveness, and allow more precise estimation of the impact of an intervention, treatment or policy option. Thus, users of research are less likely to be misled and can be more confident about what can be expected. 2
Systematic review methodologies have been applied with increasing frequency to questions of relevance to health care managers and policy-makers. Research syntheses serve a number of purposes for managers and policy-makers. "First, drawing on an existing systematic review constitutes a more efficient use of time. Why should research users comb through the research literature and struggle with appraisals of its quality when this has already been done in a systematic and transparent way? Second, a systematic review can be more constructively contested than an individual study. Without a systematic review, one study can be used in a debate to undermine an argument based on another study with a different result. The transparency in each phase of a systematic review means that debates can instead be focused on the decisions made in each phase of a review as well as on the applicability of the review in different contexts." 3 While syntheses are useful to inform decisions regarding the delivery and use of health care, they are also useful to the research community to inform their own decisions regarding future research undertakings, and to research funding organizations to focus their investments.
In recognition of the importance of research syntheses, CIHR and other research funding organizations have committed to making strategic investments in this work and expanding the community of health services and policy researchers who are able to synthesize evidence in credible, reproducible and transparent ways. In 2004 and 2005, CIHR posted a number of Requests for Applications for two types of research syntheses: scoping reviews and systematic reviews.
Scoping reviews entail the systematic selection, collection and summarization of existing evidence in a broad thematic area for the purpose of identifying areas: (a) in which sufficient evidence exists to conduct a systematic review, and (b) where insufficient evidence exists and where further primary research is necessary.
Systematic reviews entail a systematic effort to identify, assess, and interpret the global pool of knowledge available to answer a focused question.
The science of synthesis is evolving. It is not surprising, therefore, that the terms used to describe the work envisioned, as well as the methods and results of such work vary among individuals and organizations. Yet, the principles underpinning scoping reviews are simple: systematically map the literature to clarify boundaries and definitions in the area, to identify areas in which systematic reviews are possible, and to identify gaps in evidence where primary research is necessary and would be timely. Scoping reviews help the research community and research-funding organizations identify research priorities within priority thematic areas. But, they may also be very useful to the policy and practice community. For example, a scoping review may conclude that there is not sufficient evidence in an area to support a research-based recommendation, or that the evidence does not support a conclusive answer due to divergence in results. "In a political context, the knowledge that there is no research-based answer or an inconclusive answer can be a powerful resource in dealing with stakeholders who purport to have identified the best solution and in building the case for further assessments of either the present situation or new innovations." 4
The principles underpinning systematic reviews are also conceptually straightforward: "a specific and reproducible method is used to identify, select, and appraise all of the studies that meet minimum quality standards and are relevant to a particular question." 5 The results of the studies are then analyzed and summarized while taking assessments of their quality into consideration. Systematic reviews involve comprehensive reviews of evidence, and include reviews in areas where research exists across all types of evidence. For example, a systematic review could be conducted of the available qualitative research on a particular topic, or of a combination of quantitative and qualitative research.
In recognition of the fact that CIHR received relatively few grant applications in response to targeted calls to conduct this type of work 2004 and 2005, and in anticipation of increasing demand for research syntheses among the management and policy-making communities, this RFA is intended to begin to build capacity to conduct this type of work among the health services and policy research community. CIHR also recognizes that the science of synthesis is evolving, as is our understanding of how to best conduct syntheses to inform policy and practice. Therefore, this RFA also seeks to build capacity among the health services and policy research community to understand, and then further develop, the state of science regarding research syntheses and the translation of its results to inform health care decision-making.
Accordingly, the purpose of this RFA is to support a minimum of two training initiatives designed to educate health services and policy researchers in methods of conducting syntheses
Partners
CIHR - IHSPR is dedicated to identifying and developing collaborations with other CIHR institutes, branches or offices, funding organizations and stakeholders to enhance the availability of funding for this strategic initiative, and to create, where appropriate, opportunities for knowledge exchange and translation related to the scope of this particular initiative. Applicants are invited to visit the Descriptions of Partners to find a list of partners and their respective mandates and/or strategic interests. This list will continue to evolve as new partners join in this initiative.
Objectives and Relevant Research Areas
The purpose of this RFA is to support a minimum of two training initiatives designed to educate health services and policy researchers in methods of conducting syntheses in order to build additional capacity within the Canadian health services and policy research community to: (a) conduct research syntheses, and (b) understand, and further develop, the state of science regarding research syntheses and the translation of results to inform health care decision-making. Without intending to be prescriptive or exhaustive, possible training initiatives might include a series of workshops, short courses, summer institutes, purpose-built course(s) within existing training programs, and the like.
Eligibility
Eligibility criteria for all CIHR research funding programs apply. The business office of the institution of an eligible Nominated Principal Applicant generally administers CIHR funds. Please refer to the Eligibility Requirements for CIHR Grants and Awards regarding the eligibility requirements for individuals and institutions.
Allowable Costs
Applicants should review Use of Grant Funds and -A10">Eligibility of Expenses, Employment under Grants within the General Guidelines for All Research Grants for a complete listing and description of allowable costs and activities.
In addition, the following expenditures will be considered eligible for funding received through this RFA:
- Travel and accomodation for participants;
- Meeting rooms and associated meeting costs (e.g., audi-visual equipment, meals);
- Publication, translation and dissemination;
- Modest honoraria (up to $200/day per expert), where honoraria can be justified
- Fees or honoraria for the preparation of background documents.
The following costs are NOT ELIGIBLE:
- Support of research trainees or technical assistants (other than for travel and accommodation or for purposes identified above);
- Purchase or maintenance of equipment;
- Operating costs of research projects.
The full application must provide a detailed justification of all costs.
Peer Review Process and Evaluation Criteria
A CIHR peer review committee will evaluate the full applications. The committee may be drawn from one of CIHR's pre-existing committees or may be created specifically for this Request for Applications. Committee members are selected based on suggestions from many sources including the institute(s) / portfolio(s) and partner(s), following CIHR's Policy on Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest and Privacy Issues in Peer and Relevance Review (CCIP). For information on CIHR's peer review process in general, see Peer Review.
Upon completion of peer review, appropriate CIHR - IHSPR representatives will receive anonymized ranking list, review scores (ratings) and recommendations of the peer review committee with regards to funding level and grant term, for the submitted applications that fall in the fundable range. The list will be used for funding decision-making purposes. Based on the total funds available for the RFA, top ranked applications will be funded. Applications receiving a score of less than 3.5 will not be considered for funding.
The following criteria (unweighted) will be used to evaluate proposals and make funding decisions. Applicants should organize the content of their applications in such a way that it will be clear to reviewers how the proposal addresses each of these criteria:
- Team - strength of the applicants/coordinating group (i.e. track record of having conducted research syntheses, or taught methods of synthesis) and consistency of objectives with backgrounds, experience and interests of key participants;
- Feasibility, appropriateness, and likelihood of success;
- Breadth and Innovativeness - the quantity, quality, and creativity of proposed training experiences and models articulated in the application
- Value - clear demonstration of the incremental value through activity(ies) that would not otherwise occur without institute support;
- Scope - schedule of planned activities;
- Lessons learned - strength of plan for evaluating the success of the training initiative in meeting the objectives of this RFA
General CIHR Guidelines
This RFA will follow the -A">General Guidelines for All Research Funding Grants.
Conditions of Funding
All conditions specified in CIHR General Grants and Awards Policies shall apply to applications funded through this RFA. Conditions cover areas such as Applicant and Institutional Responsibilities, Ethics, Official language policy, Access to Information and Privacy Acts, and Acknowledgement of CIHR Support. Successful applicants will be informed of any special financial conditions prior to the release of funds or when they receive CIHR's Authorization for Funding (AFF) document.
In addition to CIHR standard guidelines and requirements, the following special conditions shall apply:- Within six months after the end of the grant's term, the Nominated Principal Applicant is required to submit a final performance report, summarizing the results and describing how the grant funds were used. A standard form will be provided by CIHR.
Access to Information Act and Privacy Act, and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA)
information collected by CIHR about applicants is used to review applications, to administer and monitor grants and awards, to compile statistics, and to promote and support health research in Canada. Consistent with these purposes, applicants should also expect that information collected by CIHR may be shared as described in Use and Disclosure of Personal Information Provided to CIHR for Peer Review.
CIHR as a federal entity is subject to the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, therefore the requirements of these two statutes will apply to all information located in CIHR's premises including, without limitation, cost-sharing agreements related to this Request for Applications and all matters pertaining thereto.
While respecting the application of the Privacy Act to federal entities, all signing parties involved in a collaborative agreement will also be bound by the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). All personal information (as identified by the PIPEDA) collected, used or disclosed in the course of any commercial activity under collaborative agreements related to the Request for Applications will be collected, used and disclosed in compliance with the PIPEDA.
Communications Requirements
Grant recipients are required to acknowledge CIHR, its institutes and partners in any communication or publication related to the project. See CIHR General Grants and Awards Policies, Acknowledgement of CIHR's Support for details on CIHR's communication requirements. The contributing institutes / partners will be identified on the Authorization for Funding and decision letter.
Monitoring, Performance Measurement and Evaluation
CIHR is committed to demonstrating results to Canadians for the money invested in health research. Therefore, processes for monitoring progress and appropriate use of funds, as well as for performance measurement and program evaluation are in place. As a result, funding recipients must:
- contribute to the monitoring, review and evaluation of CIHR's programs, policies and processes by participating in evaluation studies, surveys, workshops, audits and providing data or reports as required for the purpose of collecting information to assess progress and results;
- encourage their associates and administration to participate in the monitoring, review and evaluation of CIHR's programs, policies and processes as required.
How to Apply
The application process is comprised of two steps: Registration and Full Application.
Review the application instructions provided in How to Apply for Funding.
Select "Operating Grants" (Registration and Application) from the Application Packages.
Additional instructions must be followed for this RFA:1. CIHR Research Module:
- In the Research Funding Program section of the Research Module (page 8 of the web form printed report), select "Strategic Initiative/RFA" and enter the title of this RFA "Strategic Training Modules: Building Capacity to Conduct Research Synthesis Regarding Health Services and Policy Research"
- The research proposal section of the Research Module for this RFA is limited to a maximum of 6 pages, including the Summary of Research Proposal (p.9). Figures, tables and references may be listed in additional pages. The following points must be included in this section:
- A statement of the overall content and for each component of the proposed training initiative (i.e. objectives, expected audience, expert mentors)
- A summary training plan, including the organizational and administrative arrangements and schedule;
- A rationale for the constitution of the proposed participants, including invited international participants and potential partners
- Plans to disseminate and translate the outcomes of the training initiative;
- Experience in hosting/organizing previous training/workshops/conferences/activities
- Up to ten key words to describe the training initiative
2. CIHR Budget Module:
Please make sure to include a full justification for each budget line item (e.g. meeting rooms and associated meeting costs, publication/dissemination of outcomes, communications costs, contributions requested/expected from other organizations)
3. CIHR Common CV:
You must submit full Common CV modules for the Nominated Principal Applicant, Principal Applicants, Principal Decision-maker Applicants and one Co-Applicant on the team. Only abbreviated CVs (maximum 3 pages) are required for any additional Co-Applicants. Full CVs will not be considered for these applicants. The first page of the abbreviated CV should only include the contact information of the Co-Applicant (mailing address, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address, and CIHR PIN number). This information must be kept separate from the rest of the CV because it will not be forwarded to reviewers. The second and third page of the CV should include information on current grants held, relevant publications from the last five years, and expertise keywords.
All applicants including Decision Makers must have a CV and a CIHR PIN number.
Send Application by Courier to:
Submit one original and four copies of the application to the address below, by the deadline date indicated at the beginning of this RFA.
RE: "Strategic Training Modules: Building Capacity to Conduct Research Synthesis Regarding Health Services and Policy Research"
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Room 97, 160 Elgin Street
Address locator: 4809A
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9
Contact Information
For questions on CIHR funding guidelines, how to apply, and the peer review process contact:
Tamara Marshall (Updated: 2006-04-10)
Program Delivery Officer
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Telephone: (613) 941-0861
Fax: (613) 954-1800
Email: tmarshall@cihr-irsc.gc.ca
For questions about this initiative and research objectives contact:
Kim Gaudreau
Associate, Strategic Initiatives
CIHR - Institute of Health Services and Policy Research
CIHR - Institute of Population and Public Health
Telephone: (613) 957-6128
Fax: (613) 954-1800
Email: kgaudreau@cihr-irsc.gc.ca
Description of Partners: CIHR Institutes and Partner Organizations
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
CIHR is Canada's major federal funding agency for health research. Its objective is to excel, according to internationally accepted standards of scientific excellence, in the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products and a strengthened Canadian health care system.
CIHR - Institute of Health Services and Policy Research (IHSPR)
CIHR - IHSPR is dedicated to supporting innovative research, capacity-building and knowledge translation initiatives designed to improve the way health care services are organized, regulated, managed, financed, paid for, used and delivered, in the interest of improving the health and quality of life of all Canadians.
1 Sheldon TA, Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005 July; 10(1): 1-5.
2 Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004 Oct 30; 364(9445):1615-21.
3 Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Oxman A, Denis J-L, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform healthcare management and policymaking. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy; in press.
4 Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004 Oct 30; 364(9445):1615-21.
5 Moynihan R. (2004). Evaluating health services: A reporter covers the science of research syntheses. Milbank Memorial Fund. Accessed May 3, 2004 at www.milbank.org/reports/2004Moynihan/040330Moynihan.html
