Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2016 09:26
From: Ming-Wen An
Subject: ASA Committee on Funded Research Posts Document on Top Statistical Issues Seen in Proposals: Requests Comment and Input
Dear ASA Community,
This is a follow-up to the message sent by Steve Pierson on September 29, 2016. The ASA Committee on Funded Research (CFR) requests your input! We prepared a draft document Statistical Issues Seen in Non-Statistics Proposals that we first introduced in this blog entry, and seek your input towards a final version of the document. Please send feedback on the following to Steve Pierson (spierson@amstat.org) by October 31, 2016:
- your comments on the document; and
- short (one-paragraph) descriptions (i.e., case studies) of actual problems (with non-identifying specifics if possible) you have seen in proposals. The purpose of the case studies is to better illustrate statistical issues we’ve identified for a non-statistics audience.
Thanks to those of you who have already shared your feedback. We are working to incorporate those into the final version.
Our hope for this document is that it can become a useful resource for the statistical community and the broader scientific community alike. Those of us on CFR greatly value your input and thank you in advance.
Best,
------------------------------
Ming-Wen An
Vassar College
Original Message:
Sent: 09-29-2016 15:54
From: Steve Pierson
Subject: ASA Committee on Funded Research Posts Document on Top Statistical Issues Seen in Proposals: Requests Comment and Input
Dear ASA Community,
Let me draw your attention to a new blog entry by Chair of the ASA Committee on Funded Research (CFR) Ming-Wen An, ASA Committee on Funded Research Posts Document on Top Statistical Issues Seen in Proposals: Requests Comment and Input. The title of the blog largely speaks for itself but let me highlight the committee's call for:
- your comments on the document; and
- short (one-paragraph) descriptions (i.e., case studies) of actual problems (with non-identifying specifics if possible) you have seen in proposals. The purpose of the case studies is to better illustrate statistical issues we’ve identified for a non-statistics audience.
In her post, Ming highlights a just published interview in the NIH Center for Scientific Review publication, Peer Review Notes: Statisticians Share Insights for Applicants and Reviewers, and notes the relationship of it to the CFR document. The interviewees, Marie Davidian, Karen Messer, Liz Stuart, and Andrew Althouse reviewed an early version of the CFR document and also contributed to it. As Ming writes, the CFR document "is intended to provide more details and further recommendations," thereby complementing the Peer Review Notes article.
The committee (and I) hope you the readers will respond to the call to improve and supplement the document. The committee will use your comments and case study submissions to publish a final version of the document after the October 31 deadline for input.
Best,
Steve
------------------------------
Steve Pierson
Director of Science Policy
American Statistical Association
------------------------------