Richard Benson Scott Janis - Informal chat - funding options for fellows and junior faculty

October 27, 2021

ID7080

To CiteDCA Citation Guide

00:03I'm sorry Richard.
00:04No, uh, you know we told people one o'clock.
00:08It's possible that a couple people may
00:10may join and I I know shadi's still on.
00:13But uhm, Richard really wanted to
00:15give you the floor to to discuss
00:17and share anything that you'd like,
00:19but also we'll see who stays on become,
00:22you know, see if if people have
00:25questions about, you.
00:27Know just the process in various initiatives.
00:30You know one thing.
00:31I think that as we were planning a
00:33conference and speaking with our
00:34both our senior folks or chairs
00:37and as well as our junior people,
00:40the sense was,
00:41I think in a very positive way that
00:44there have been a number of initiatives
00:47which NINDS and I have launched 4 early.
00:50You know early career and just
00:54done early career folks in general,
00:55but also related to some of
00:57the topics that you mentioned.
00:59Or you know before in your.
01:01Earlier talks soum.
01:04You know so,
01:04so we thought this would be good for
01:06him to have some exchange about that.
01:07You know even the no see that
01:09you that you mentioned.
01:11I know that we've had several
01:13faculty that would be eligible
01:14that have asked about it but
01:16didn't know exactly how it worked.
01:18So anyway,
01:20OK, no, no, that's good.
01:22Yeah, and we are still according
01:24to my clock, 2 minutes early.
01:27So factor Janice is also on.
01:30He may have to drop off a little early but.
01:34Yes, I have one of my.
01:36Inage colleagues here that I.
01:39Respect as well.
01:42He and I have been working
01:44together with a lot of K23.
01:47Individuals come.
01:49Some have been quite successful after
01:53you know meeting with them too, so.
01:57I'm glad that he could come.
01:59Be here for at least part of the time.
02:03Maybe if I come.
02:04The trainees if you guys are
02:07on an over early,
02:08but if you.
02:09Have any questions or want to
02:11say hi or anything for you?
02:15So turn on your video or.
02:18Yeah, I I encourage everyone in
02:19general and especially I think in
02:21this smaller group of folks were
02:23willing to turn on their video. I can.
02:25It might be really helpful and you know,
02:28is I think folks in our consortium now.
02:30I certainly won't have no problem calling
02:32people out in embarrassing them a little bit,
02:36so I may forget a few,
02:37but I I do see you know Adam to have none.
02:42And Nils Petersen,
02:43who are both K award ease and I see.
02:48Others that either have caves under
02:51review or putting them in or and yet
02:54others that are involved in various
02:56other fellowship training programs
02:57and research programs as well.
03:01May I just lead with a question about just
03:05the definition of race? You know, the NIH
03:10uses has always used the classification
03:15of black, white, Hispanic.
03:18It's it's. It's not necessarily
03:22what people self identify as and
03:24doesn't really account for a wider,
03:28broader perspective about race.
03:30I know it's a little unrelated,
03:32but is there any internal discussion about?
03:35Changing the way those
03:38characteristics are reported.
03:41No, it's a great question.
03:42Karen, UM, so I've been working.
03:47Actually, one of the leads is my
03:50colleagues Dr Carolena Mendoza Pacino,
03:52who's been updating the the Phoenix Toolkit,
03:55which is a common data elements set up and
03:59we have been looking at issues related to
04:02social determinants of health and race,
04:04ethnic categories and everything.
04:05As I mentioned at the outset,
04:07a lot of HR's.
04:09They're very limited in terms of the kind of
04:12information that you can collect around race,
04:14ethnicity, and their issues.
04:17Around you know a lot of
04:19different categories,
04:20including mixed race,
04:21which is within one because now
04:23we know that the number of people
04:26who are defining as self defining,
04:28which is the way that this should go.
04:30'cause that's probably more
04:32aligned with risk factors based
04:34upon how people define themselves,
04:36mixed race categories, and so
04:38oftentimes that's difficult to collect.
04:40In some of these databases.
04:42And so yeah, I think it's something
04:44that we've been talking about,
04:46and it's something that has to be.
04:47Updated and I am HD.
04:49Uses the term of.
04:52And I used to find health
04:54disparities populations which has
04:55gotten a lot of pushback,
04:57so it's sort of pejorative health
04:59disparities populations that term.
05:01But then it has like blacks,
05:03Hispanics, Native Americans,
05:04and it goes into those categories.
05:06But there are a lot of categories
05:08that are sort of not mentioned,
05:10and and it's not totally clear.
05:14And so when you start talking
05:15about mixed race and all of that,
05:17and raised because it's so it,
05:19it is the social construct.
05:21And then when you start talking
05:23about mixed race and all of that it,
05:24it starts to fall apart and then when
05:26we try to apply that to global 'cause
05:28we look at the common data elements.
05:30But when you go to a global setting you
05:33know what does black mean in Africa.
05:35You know in the African countries
05:36you know it doesn't mean anything.
05:38So I mean it's a purely sort of,
05:40you know,
05:41United States focused social construct.
05:44It has a lot of problems,
05:46but I think defining the problem
05:47and tackling it just as you
05:49mentioned is very important.
05:50We do have to collect the data
05:52because it is an important marker.
05:54We can't sort of ignore it,
05:55but it is an important marker
05:58because it's so closely linked to
06:00health outcomes and you know the
06:01social determinants of health,
06:03but it's very problematic.
06:07From all I can go into talking about
06:08for a long time it issue you're right.
06:11So thank you know I appreciate it
06:12and I don't want it to track from the
06:14from the other early career folks,
06:16but it is something that obviously is.
06:19It seems like it needs some correction,
06:22but yeah, yeah, I agree.
06:26Uhm, so please if anyone has you
06:29know any comments about things that
06:31I talked about please jump out.
06:34You know one thing that a lot of people
06:37don't do it it's it's been published
06:40and we talked about this at the NIH.
06:42I'll that.
06:44Researchers that actually contact
06:46their program.
06:47Officials at the NIH and they interact
06:49with them a lot that they actually do
06:52better and review so we can actually
06:54be very helpful at the NIH in terms of
06:56interacting with us and talking to us.
06:58And so, as I mentioned at the outset,
07:00some of you may have missed it.
07:01That Scott Janice,
07:02who's on here?
07:03He's over the stroke program.
07:05He and I we've met with quite
07:07a few we we both have different
07:09styles and different ways.
07:10Sort of attacking this,
07:12but we've met with several K 23.
07:14Uhm candidates and we sort of go
07:17through and we reach or specific games.
07:20We offer comments about the process and
07:22everything and so that's part of what we do.
07:25But people sometimes don't contact us.
07:29We are very busy,
07:29but that's part of what we do.
07:31We can schedule time to do this and you know,
07:35I think we actually like it.
07:36You know it's a lot of interesting work
07:38that we get to read about and to hear.
07:40You know how people are thinking about
07:42things and so we could really offer a lot.
07:45So I guess my first point of advice
07:48is to contact us at the at the NIH
07:51and Inds if you're considering
07:54submitting to us what we normally do,
07:57we have different areas of expertise.
07:59If it's something my expertise is
08:01through vascular disease and stroke,
08:03and obviously you know HealthEquity
08:05health disparities in global health.
08:06But if it's another area,
08:08then we'll bring on.
08:10I can get someone from the NIDS
08:14who has an expertise in, let's say.
08:16If it's Ms or something in the 80 RT space,
08:19or epilepsy or or something else I
08:21can pull on my colleagues and we
08:23normally will have these joint meetings
08:25and go through and discuss your your
08:28specific games and your application
08:30and the other parts of review.
08:33So that's that's the first point
08:35that I'd say come.
08:38Thank
08:39you Richard. You know that's such
08:41a generous and important offer,
08:42because if I was writing AK,
08:44I can't imagine having better input
08:47and reviewers from somebody at NINDS
08:49who sort of boots on the ground.
08:51You have access to the top people you've
08:54written and reviewed hundreds of grants.
08:56I mean to have your expertise and and
08:59review eyes would just be invaluable.
09:02So thank you for making that offer.
09:03That's great.
09:05Right? Yeah wait, I might add just so that
09:09folks understand with training grants.
09:11Training grants are
09:12specific to the institutes.
09:15So even though that the the mechanisms
09:17are used broadly across NIH training
09:19in cancer or heart disease is very
09:22different than training in neurology.
09:24So when we have study
09:26sections that review these,
09:27these are Institute review study sections.
09:29These are not CSR study sections,
09:32so they are run effectively in House,
09:34and that means that a culture gets developed.
09:37Within the review,
09:37and that's really what
09:38Richard kind of speaking to.
09:39There's a lot of nuances with
09:42training programs that neither
09:43Richard nor I are like up to speed on,
09:45and that's why we have a training office.
09:47We have another resource to help us think
09:49through some of those policy things too,
09:51but it's not like writing a narrow one.
09:53It's a very different type of approach,
09:55but I think from that standpoint Mark,
09:58that's kind of what you're getting too.
10:00Is that you know,
10:01we hear and we listen to sort of what
10:04the culture is within those reviews,
10:06and that's really what.
10:07We're trying to respond to we can't
10:10write somebody's grant come off,
10:12and we can offer opinions or
10:14suggestions which you know, I think,
10:17are important for folks just to think about,
10:20you know, and not because we make them,
10:21but more because if somebody
10:23is thinking about the problem,
10:24it's worth rethinking about it,
10:26because perhaps you're just not
10:28articulating it clear enough yet that
10:30she would have to get to a level of a,
10:32you know, grant application.
10:33We can't solve.
10:34Those problems were not even allowed
10:36to write your grants, because.
10:37You know that that goes negatively interview,
10:39but I think that's the whole process.
10:41This just having the conversations,
10:43not just with folks like us,
10:45but also you know with with the
10:47mentors and and perhaps even other
10:50fellows who have received K23,
10:52they've gone through the experience
10:54and they have a perspective on
10:55it that you know gives them some
10:57insight on how to be successful so.
11:01Thank you, yeah, more
11:03valuable insights. Thank you.
11:08So please just jump out and.
11:13Ask any questions about anything
11:14I talked about earlier or anything
11:17on your mind or the other piece.
11:19Is that if you have an application and it's
11:23not one that's appropriate for any ideas,
11:25we can also be helpful at referring you to
11:28someone at one of the other eye sees as well.
11:31You do want to open up your possibility of
11:34funding by looking at other institutes.
11:37If your research area falls in another
11:39category, but since you all are,
11:42since this is stroke net, I'm short.
11:43Broken so it should be related to us.
11:47Great, I I know there are a bunch of Ali
11:50and Mike and some of our stroke net fellows,
11:53Rachel and others so it's great to
11:55see a Nishant. I mean a bunch of folks
11:57here so it's so fair to speak up.
11:59I might pair it to Richard and Scott.
12:02A few questions that I know I've heard from
12:05some of you recently won and Scott, you may.
12:09I think you've touched on this recently.
12:11You know, as people are transitioning
12:13from K20 threes and stroke net fellows.
12:17You know they've seen,
12:18I think in recent memory,
12:19we've all seen large phase three
12:21trials at stroke net which you
12:23know certain type of trial,
12:25and I think sometimes may
12:27feel intimidating or but,
12:28but maybe you can also comment a little
12:31bit about how the network is thinking about
12:34phase one or smaller phase two trials,
12:37minimal numbers of centers because I
12:39think there are a number of people here
12:41that I I know are working on programs
12:44where that you know that may be relevant.
12:47Yeah, uhm, so I'm you know
12:49I'm very favorable I.
12:51I think one of the goals or stroke
12:55net that we're still working on
12:57was there was a idea of continuity
13:00of development that you know that
13:02we can evolve ideas through some
13:05of the earlier work and then have
13:08that sort of memory embedded
13:10within the system that would help
13:12rapidly advance it to a larger,
13:14definitive study if that's
13:16where the science went.
13:17You know, and I think you know
13:19there's there's questions.
13:19Naturally,
13:20when we launched in that were already there,
13:22which is why we had some of the
13:24large Bay Street trials.
13:25I think there's some natural
13:27questions and prevention that
13:28have led to phase three trials.
13:30You know?
13:30Truthfully,
13:31it's a little easier to design A
13:33phase three trial than it is to
13:35design A phase one or phase two trial,
13:37you know,
13:37but I don't think that's a reason
13:38to kind of steer away from it.
13:40But, you know, I,
13:41I would just sort of echo that
13:43we're looking at a lot of ways
13:45of sort of advancing the science.
13:47The biology,
13:48UM and not just kind of going after.
13:52You know,
13:53maybe necessarily the big ticket items.
13:54Maybe it's going after what could
13:57actually change the course of
13:58the disease would be important
14:00to the patients you know.
14:01I I,
14:02I wanted to build on something Richard said,
14:04just as a as a general comment
14:06'cause we get this sort of all
14:07the time when people reach out
14:09they'll say is this something
14:10and Inds is interested in.
14:12This is something that you will find
14:14you know well the truth of it is
14:16is that you know we we have that we get.
14:18The money to be able to administer it,
14:20but we're really listening to
14:22you to tell us whether or not
14:24something is important to be done.
14:25So really, the expertise in the field, right?
14:28And the expertise and the
14:29knowledge of where we need to go,
14:31and so the reviewers are
14:33not government employees.
14:35The reviewers are picked from the
14:37various academic institutions and
14:39in responding to what they see as
14:41the priorities and needs within the field.
14:44So I think those two kind of go
14:45hand in hand because we're really
14:47trying to follow the thread.
14:49NIH has a unique position because
14:50we can do things that companies
14:53might not necessarily be interested
14:55in because it's further down
14:57the stream of development.
14:58We're really looking to bend the science
15:00pathway and try to move forward,
15:02so just just sort of thoughts
15:04to keep in mind.
15:05But yeah, absolutely,
15:06I think you know if it doesn't
15:08fit stroke that we do have many
15:10different pathways that would be
15:12preliminary to doing a trial that
15:14we can also open up those doors.
15:16'cause again we sort of see this
15:17as a pure developmental.
15:19Hopefully all the way from the
15:20basic science up to the translation
15:22and eventually to the trials.
15:27Thanks and I I just put my
15:29email address in the chat.
15:30So if you you know think of something
15:33that you want to email and ask
15:35me about later on, but it's got.
15:37That's that's a great point that
15:39he just made that you know you
15:41are in the field and the experts
15:43if you think of a great idea
15:45that you would like to develop,
15:47then you know that's your idea.
15:49And then we can sort of let you know,
15:50sort of. Uhm, you know where it fits?
15:54Or you can talk to us and say,
15:55hey, this is an important problem.
15:56It's something we need to focus
15:58on and go from there.
15:59That that's how some of the
16:01best ideas sort of come out.
16:02It's sort of that bedside back to the bench.
16:07Sometimes
16:07we can help sort of with the competing space.
16:10You know that's one of the downsides
16:12with the federal funding is that we only
16:14have so much in our pot, which means,
16:16and we have to distribute it.
16:18We have a very large you know,
16:20portfolio of diseases that are covered
16:22in neurology and we're responsible
16:23pretty much for all of them.
16:25So it doesn't mean that we have unlimited
16:28opportunities to overlap things.
16:30But sometimes where we can,
16:31we can sort of spot is sort of
16:33where that things are moving,
16:35and maybe try and help.
16:37Push that into a,
16:38you know into its own model
16:39niche that would be successful.
16:43Richard and Scott, something that I've
16:45noticed across the research portfolio,
16:47is that more and more studies are including
16:50biomarkers either in the main study or
16:52in a subsequent study or sub study,
16:55and you know, I'm just interested
16:58in your perspective because.
16:59Again, you see the whole portfolio,
17:01not just stroke, but cancer.
17:04Ms other things.
17:07What has been the track record of these
17:10biomarkers across the research enterprise?
17:12Are they? Do they end up being helpful
17:15in 90% of the cases or 5% of the cases,
17:18or does it vary just so much by
17:21disease and in terms of being helpful,
17:23are they helpful for prognosis,
17:25diagnosis, triage therapies?
17:27Because certainly they're very popular,
17:30but so far I haven't heard the
17:32end result of the impact that
17:33they may or may not have had.
17:38Yeah, excuse me,
17:39I think it's a great question.
17:42We actually. I think it depends.
17:45I I know in the ADR D space that there are
17:49a lot of biomarkers out there because of,
17:52you know, early detection of of
17:54the Alzheimer's or various types
17:57of dementia as well as biomarkers.
17:59You know Mr Imaging and all of that,
18:02and so there may be certain areas
18:04where a biomarker is helpful.
18:06It can be helpful and less invasive.
18:08Helpful, less invasive way of diagnosing
18:12or a way of picking up sort of early
18:15disease or preclinical disease.
18:18And so there are certain spaces where
18:20the biomarker field is very important.
18:22The other thing is good for translation.
18:24If there's something that's happening
18:26in the preclinical space or something
18:28that we need to take from clinical
18:31space and go back and look at
18:32it in the preclinical space,
18:34that may be important from
18:35that standpoint as well.
18:37So I I think it sort of depends.
18:39You know,
18:40we sort of look at things and if we
18:44can tie it to the preclinical sort of
18:47biomarker space and the disease space,
18:50then you know we're getting
18:52the basic scientists as well as
18:54the clinical scientists.
18:55And I think the NIH wants to
18:57fund both types of research.
18:59But also if there's a good clinical
19:02intervention that you have that you
19:04know doesn't have a biomarker doesn't
19:06mean that that's not important or not.
19:09One other thing I want to mention,
19:10that sort of Scott to that point was
19:14solicited versus unsolicited applications,
19:16and sort of a point that Scott brought
19:19up that we do have solicitations.
19:22We know that a lot of applications
19:24that come in,
19:25there's just sort of independent,
19:27you know,
19:28research that that the investigator
19:30suggests and submits for funding.
19:33But we do know that a lot of research is
19:36sparked by solicitation in certain areas,
19:38and so we are.
19:39Thinking about that and we do think
19:41uniquely so it goes to your point mark,
19:45we do have solicitations that we're looking,
19:47and we may ask specifically that we're
19:50looking for biomarkers in a particular area,
19:52or we're looking for something
19:54where something can be translated.
19:56From preclinical to clinical,
19:58we may ask specifically and we do
20:00those solicitations in order to
20:02spark research in a particular area.
20:05So we do expect to have more
20:07solicitations in the HealthEquity space,
20:11and you know other spaces as well.
20:14Just wanted to put that in there
20:16too that there are certain things
20:17so the other benefit of speaking
20:18to us ahead of time is that there
20:20may be some solicitations out there
20:22that you may not be familiar of,
20:24and there may be a benefit of applying to.
20:29Solicitations so.
20:33Martin aren't
20:34your question just a tad bit you know I?
20:36I don't know if biomarkers is the
20:39sort of new tonight buzzword, I mean.
20:42Obviously there's a lot of research that
20:44covers all the areas that you mentioned
20:46from discovery to progress station.
20:48All that kind of stuff how we might predict
20:50whether somebody develops in the disease,
20:51that kind of thing.
20:53But I think you know from our interests
20:56where we've sort of focused on,
20:58I think because technology has advanced
21:00as much as it has and we have different.
21:03Opportunities as well.
21:03I think you see a lot more of these
21:06kind of mirroring together like you,
21:08Walter cautious,
21:09has you know he has a distinct interest
21:12in our sort of middle phase trials and
21:15really trying to bring the treatment
21:18closer to the biological target.
21:20You know as a way of really sort of
21:22having some basis for deciding whether or
21:24not we should go on to do one of these
21:27expensive large clinical type studies.
21:29And that's what actually you know,
21:32created neuro next.
21:33For the broader neurology space,
21:35and it's a lot of things
21:37that we sometimes look for.
21:38So when we when I think of you know where the
21:40where the opportunities are for biomarkers,
21:42I think there are multifaceted some
21:44of its to learn about the disease.
21:47Some of it you know is to help
21:49potentially build in so that we
21:50could use it more effectively in
21:52some of these early phase trials,
21:54and some of it might just be
21:55in that discovery space.
21:56And that's what Richard is talking about.
21:57There's there's a.
21:58There's a vast interest across
22:00many different diseases,
22:01not just stroke with, you know.
22:03How we can sort of capitalize on?
22:06You know what we now know in
22:08the technologies that we have,
22:09and how we might be able to combine
22:11that for purposes of really
22:12understanding the you know the
22:14biology and the brain a little bit
22:16better in that just looking to see
22:18whether that's something safe to use.
22:21Excellent thank you for addressing
22:23my question, really appreciate it.
22:28That highlights as well the fact
22:29that like and I mentioned Scott and I
22:31particular 'cause we work on these a lot.
22:33We actually have different
22:34ways of looking at things.
22:36I value his opinion.
22:37A lot of this 'cause we we will
22:38attack a problem different ways and
22:40you will hear things differently.
22:42So that's the the benefit of
22:44calling you here and and having
22:46this discussion in different ways.
22:48Sort of thinking about research question
22:50and I think it's very important,
22:52and so that's something we can offer.
22:57Richard is got.
22:58It's it's Lawrence dancing.
22:59Hey, thanks so much for
23:01for talking with everyone
23:02and then I'll have it.
23:03Something that Kevin said earlier.
23:05Which is we have a range of people on my
23:07call from service fellows and stroking
23:09it fellows people who are writing
23:12caves and and have kids and are
23:14transitioning off of K
23:16since you larger grants.
23:17And I thought maybe it would
23:19be helpful if you could just
23:21comment a little bit on that.
23:22And I NDS initiatives for
23:25those sort of early career.
23:28Come and new investigator
23:30statuses because those might
23:32be pieces of information that
23:34not everyone knows about and
23:36may help them in terms of planning
23:39that transition to independence as
23:41they're coming off their case and
23:42we're just being helpful to hear
23:44your perspectives on. Michael,
23:45make a couple comments in Richard.
23:47Please add on to what I probably don't know,
23:49but so there's you know we've been
23:51focusing a lot of discussion on these
23:55training opportunities, you know.
23:56And we talked, you know,
23:58probably more specific to this crowd.
24:00K20 threes, but there was other
24:02mechanisms as well and I would sort
24:05of emphasize that you know the way
24:07the training program was designed.
24:09This it's it's a way for us.
24:12You know the NIH two invest in an individual.
24:16He's interested in research,
24:17try and help you know through that mechanism.
24:20Provide them with the additional training
24:22around a project that doesn't have to be.
24:25You know, a Nobel project.
24:27I mean, it's it's really
24:28something that is of interest.
24:29That kind of gets started,
24:30but the focus really is on that training
24:33with an understanding that you know at
24:35the end of that that's training program.
24:38You know we have somebody who's
24:40really ready and capable of you know,
24:42supporting and being supported
24:44by RR R1 type markets, or are.
24:46Regular research grants,
24:48so it really is an investment in the person.
24:51That being said,
24:52moving past that 'cause there's a lot of
24:54different research mechanisms that we have,
24:57the new investigator status that
24:59you were talking about is just an
25:02effort that's been made NIH wide
25:04to help broaden a little bit.
25:06Some of those stringent paylin territories
25:10for investigators that are just
25:12walking into that competitive space.
25:15So basically what that means?
25:17Is that they're not really
25:19reviewed differently,
25:19although I mean study sections.
25:21Do they do distinguish between somebody
25:24who's a new investigator versus somebody
25:27who's an established investigator?
25:29They're still going to get
25:30evaluated on this science,
25:31but often what the institutes have
25:33done is they've extended pay lines,
25:35and there's certain situations to
25:37still be able to pay somebody.
25:39You know that may have been close,
25:41but maybe it's just rookie mistakes
25:43because they're still learning.
25:45You know, those aren't initiative guided.
25:47Things those are really sort
25:48of policy Dr driven things.
25:49It's just things that you know
25:51we try and do a broader space to
25:53help you know support,
25:54but I you know I always steer folks
25:56towards you know the opportunities
25:58of the training programs because
26:00I think they're great.
26:01You know,
26:02I think what happens is very often we get
26:05folks that will come to us and they'll say,
26:07you know,
26:08I want to do an R21
26:09because it's a small grant.
26:10It gets under the radar screen.
26:12It's perfect because I don't have
26:13preliminary data and all of that,
26:15and I don't know that that's necessarily the.
26:17This streamlined,
26:18easy way in because our 20 ones
26:21are a very unique specific type
26:23of mechanism that NIH uses,
26:25and it's not at all what
26:27investigators think it is.
26:28And so I think that you know
26:31the training route you know,
26:33particularly in the early stage career
26:34is is a really good opportunity
26:36to kind of get into that.
26:38The only other comment that I'll
26:40make on mechanisms because it's a
26:42convoluted sort of spaced for us 'cause
26:44there's so many is that I prefer that
26:46folks come to us, not necessarily.
26:48Thinking about what they want to apply to,
26:50but you know the interest in what
26:51they're trying to apply for a meeting
26:53that we focus on the project and then
26:55we can kind of maybe go backwards
26:56and find what best fits that space
26:58because you know there are different
27:01mechanisms intended across NIH to
27:03support different types of research.
27:05And you know if you were trying to write,
27:08you know a grant for a specific mechanism,
27:10thinking that your target is
27:12the mechanism first,
27:12you're probably going to fail before you
27:14succeed because it doesn't work that way.
27:16You know the mechanism is just literally.
27:18Something that facilitates
27:19our ability to to to fund it.
27:22So really the important part is the project,
27:24or in the case the training
27:25and that kind of thing.
27:26I don't know, Richard,
27:27do you have another thought on that?
27:28'cause I'm?
27:29No, no, I I think that was great.
27:31What you said I won't I just try to
27:34attack the question from a different
27:36perspective what what I would say
27:38is that we actually have a training
27:40office which is run by Steve Corn.
27:42So I think that it would be important
27:44if you have not to talk to him.
27:46In addition to that,
27:47we actually have a diversity training
27:49office and I've referenced that.
27:51So if you're an individual from
27:54one of those underrepresented
27:55categories that I talked about
27:57earlier than you should speak with.
27:59From Michelle zones London.
28:01People from that office as well
28:04because it's got mentioned, we do
28:05have a lot of mechanisms that are there.
28:08If you do have a K.
28:11We as Scott mentioned,
28:12that isn't investment and so having
28:14a K does increase your chance of
28:16going on and getting your your
28:18first are even though people can get
28:20ours without having case that that
28:23there's definitely a benefit to that.
28:25I guess the only other thing that I
28:27would say if you're an early career.
28:30A stage investigator and you don't have
28:32a K and you haven't submitted in our I.
28:35I think it's important to sort of
28:37still sort of look at your career
28:39trajectory and see you know where you
28:41want to go and what it is that you are
28:43interested in doing at Scott saying.
28:45Do you want to develop a research area or
28:47you continue to publish in a particular area?
28:50Do you want to move in
28:52the patient care space?
28:53You know if you're having difficulty
28:55coming up with a research project or
28:57moving in that direction, do you need?
29:00More training in that area.
29:03There is a a program.
29:05It's for, UM,
29:06diverse individuals,
29:07but it's called to transcend program
29:09and it's for early career stage and
29:12investigators from diverse backgrounds
29:14where you can get masters in clinical
29:16research and help to develop specific
29:19games for project so it just sort
29:22of consider is that what sort of?
29:26Uhm?
29:28Slowing you down if that's if that's
29:30if you're interested in a career
29:32and continuing a career in research,
29:34so you really have to have that
29:36that conversation with yourself,
29:38because ultimately it is you
29:40being comfortable.
29:41Being able to get up and go to
29:43work everyday and and feeling
29:45good about what you're doing.
29:46It's going to be a lot of work,
29:48but if you are doing something
29:49that you really like, then it it?
29:51It doesn't seem as much as work,
29:53so you really have to have that
29:55conversation with yourself to
29:56balance all those factors together.
29:58Uhm, so I think that that's important.
30:01Uh we we talked about I.
30:03I mentioned the the first program,
30:05which was a program to try to retain
30:08cohorts of diverse individuals and academia.
30:12So that's important because
30:14it's a vulnerable state.
30:16Being an early stage investigator,
30:18you're sort of developing
30:20your own research area,
30:22developing your self as
30:24a practicing clinician,
30:26and also a person, an academic department.
30:28And so there are a lot of things
30:30that may be going on in your mind.
30:31You can't talk to people about or
30:34you feel sort of singled out, or,
30:36you know, can't address those things.
30:39So again, you have to find the right
30:41people to talk to, to do those.
30:43And there are people that
30:44are there to to help you.
30:45And if we can help at the NIH, then sort of.
30:49You know, let us know.
30:51I have my email there.
30:53That again, was a roundabout
30:55way to answering the question,
30:56but wanted to say something
30:58different from what God said.
30:59So just think just think about that.
31:02Yeah,
31:02I'm gonna have to jump off of
31:04that DSMB and I think you got it.
31:05Your session is going to continue,
31:07but the only thing that I would
31:09sort of part with is patience and
31:11persistence are are really important
31:14attributes to success as well as
31:18acknowledging that frustration and
31:20failure is part of the process.
31:22You know it, it doesn't.
31:24You know nothing.
31:25Nothing become successful overnight.
31:26I mean, I think it's it.
31:27It takes time, but if you do invest
31:30that that patients in that persistence.
31:33It it's, you know, we've seen,
31:35I think more rewards than than
31:37in failures in the long run.
31:43Good thanks, thanks God.
31:44Thanks for hanging around.
31:45I see a question from Mike in the chat.
31:48I mean I, I think yeah if you want
31:52to email me we can talk about that.
31:54We do have.
31:55We have a separate line of funding
31:57for projects in the 80RD space,
31:59but you know that you have to think
32:02which between delirium versus.
32:06You know mild cognitive impairment going
32:09along the trajectory of sort of that
32:11ADR BSP versus delirium from one of the
32:14other factors that can cause delirium.
32:17So, but I I think it's an
32:20interesting topic and we can talk
32:22about that more if you want to.
32:24I don't know if you,
32:25I know you're have a tight timeline, so.
32:28Uh, I think we're gonna have to
32:30stop the next minute so it may
32:31be better if you just email me
32:33and we can talk about it more.
32:38Thank you so much, Richard and
32:40Scott and everyone for attending a.
32:43I think we will go ahead and move.