Common deficiencies of NIDRR research applications

The purpose of this article was to identify and describe those deficiencies determined by nonfederal peer reviewers during the most recent 1989 NIDRR research competition to mitigate successful funding support from the lead federal agency concerned with medical rehabilitation research. In 1989, 232 field investigator-initiated research applications were received in response to the Federal Register announcement of September 8, 1988. Of these, 57 or 24.5% were assigned to the Medical Sciences Programs office. Six applications were ultimately approved and funded (10.7%). The remaining 51 (89.5%) were statistically analyzed to determine deficiencies significant in warranting disapproval. The 51 applications averaged 5.68 deficiencies each. Five types of research error accounted for 76.8% of all deficiencies noted by reviewers. These included methodologic errors (25) and inadequate control of subject variables (25), followed by inappropriate research design (24), poor conceptualization of problem/approach (21) and incorrect statistical analysis (14). The top ranked singular deficiency was poor conceptualization of problems or approach. Other flaws warranting lowering of potential scores by reviewers included excessive budget requests, duplication of effort with on-going supported research, inadequate background of investigator and weak dissemination and utilization plans. In conclusion, many applications are submitted for the NIDRR field investigator-initiated research program competitions that are significantly deficient. Those identified areas of deficiency cover most oF the conceptualization, research design and methodologic criteria essential for valid, creditable scientific investigation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)