SUOMEN AKATEMIA Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta

Transkriptio

1 SUOMEN AKATEMIA Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta TERVEYDEN TUTKIMUKSEN TOIMIKUNNALTA TUTKIJATOHTORIN RAHOITUSTA SYYSKUUN HAUSSA 2013 HAKENEILLE ( päättynyt haku) Arvoisa hakija, Suomen Akatemian terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta päätti kokouksessaan rahoitettavista tutkijatohtorihakemuksista. Hakija saa rahoituspäätöksestä automaattisen ilmoituksen sähköpostiinsa. Rahoitetut hankkeet ovat nähtävissä Akatemian verkkosivuilla osoitteessa kohdassa Päätökset ja vaikutukset > Rahoituspäätökset. Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunnalle osoitettiin syyskuun haussa 130 tutkijatohtorihakemusta, joissa haettiin rahoitusta yhteensä 34,7 miljoonaa euroa. Toimikunta teki rahoituspäätöksiä yhteensä 4,3 miljoonalla eurolla ja myönsi rahoituksen 16 tutkijatohtoriprojektille. Myönteisen rahoituspäätöksen sai 12 % hakijoista. Rahoitetut tutkijatohtorit: Autio, Anu Kristiina Bimbo, Luis M Ekolle Ndode-Ekane, Xavier Forma, Leena Päivikki Korhonen, Juha Tapio Kublbeck, Jenni Marjaana Latvala, Antti E Pahkala, Katja Annukka Pfisterer, Simon G Richter, Uwe Rinne, Pasi Petteri Erik Sahu, Biswajyoti Strandin, Tomas M Tarkkonen, Kati Maria Verma, Bhupendra Voutilainen, Merja H Toimikunta päätti kokouksessaan asettaa kuusi hakemusta varasijalistalle. Mikäli joku tutkijatohtorirahoituksen saajista ei ota vastaan saamaansa rahoitusta tai luopuu siitä ennen vuoden 2014 loppua, listalle kuuluville hankkeille voidaan tarjota rahoitusta varasijalistan osoittamassa järjestyksessä. Toimikunta päätti varasijalistan järjestyksestä seuraavasti: 1. Jiu, Yaming 2. Rajala, Kristiina Maria 3. Haukioja, Anna Liisa Kyllikki 4. Järvinen, Tiina 5. Kangas-Kontio, Tiia Maria 6. Lahti, Marius Rahoituksen maksaminen edellyttää vastuullisen johtajan (= hakija) sekä suorituspaikan vahvistusta rahoituksen vastaanottamisesta Akatemian verkkoasioinnin kautta mennessä. Kun rahoituksen vastaanotto on vahvistettu verkkoasioinnin kautta, vastuullinen johtaja ja tutkimuksen suorituspaikka hyväksyvät rahoituspäätöksen sisällön kokonaisuudessaan ja sitoutuvat noudattamaan Akatemian asettamia rahoituksen käyttöön liittyviä ehtoja. Rahoituspäätöksiin liittyvät ehdot on esitetty Akatemian verkkosivuilla: Hakemukset arvioitiin kansainvälisissä arviointipaneeleissa (liite 1), jotka kokoontuivat tammihelmikuussa Helsingissä. Paneelit ovat arviointityössään käyttäneet tarvittaessa lisäasiantuntemusta toisen paneelin jäseniltä tai ulkopuolisilta asiantuntijoilta. Paneeli keskusteli jokaisesta hakemuksesta ja antoi niistä arvosanan sekä kirjallisen lausunnon, joka on luettavissa verkkoasioinnissa hakijan omilla tunnuksilla. Kaikki paneelin jäsenet vastaavat yhteisesti annetusta lausunnosta.

2 Arviointipaneelit pitivät hakemusten tieteellistä laatua yleisesti hyvänä, parhaita arvosanoja saaneita hankkeita pidettiin kilpailukykyisinä kansainvälisellä tasolla. Tutkimussuunnitelmien tieteellisestä laadusta tehtiin yhteenveto (liite 2), jossa asiantuntijapaneelit nostivat esille yleisimpiä ja usein toistuvia tutkimussuunnitelman laatuun vaikuttavia seikkoja. Tutkijatohtorihakemusten arvosanojen jakauma, päättynyt haku (130 hakemusta) Rating scale Outstanding 5 Excellent 4 Very good 3 Good 2 Unsatisfactory 1 Weak All projects Funded projects Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta perehtyi hakemuksiin kiinnittäen erityistä huomiota paneelin antamiin lausuntoihin. Rahoituspäätöksiä tehdessään toimikunta piti tieteellistä laatua ensisijaisena ja tärkeimpänä asiana päätöksenteossa. Tieteellisesti tasaväkisten hakemusten osalta otettiin huomioon muita asioita kuten eri tutkimusalojen tarpeet sekä hankkeisiin liittyvät hyvään tieteelliseen käytäntöön ja aineettomiin oikeuksiin liittyvät kysymykset. Mikäli sinulla on hakuun liittyviä kysymyksiä tai kommentteja, pyydän ottamaan yhteyttä puhelimitse tai sähköpostitse. Heikki Vilen Tiedeasiantuntija, terveyden tutkimus p heikki.vilen@aka.fi LIITTEET: Liite 1. Asiantuntijapaneelien kokoonpano Liite 2. Asiantuntijapaneelien palaute hakijoille (englanniksi)

3 FINLANDS AKADEMI Forskningsrådet för hälsa FÖR DE SOM SÖKT FORSKARANSTÄLLNING SOM FORSKARDOKTOR HOS FORSKNINGSRÅDET FÖR HÄLSA (septemberutlysningen 2013) Bästa sökande, Forskningsrådet för hälsa vid Finlands Akademi har vid sitt möte den 4 juni 2014 fattat beslut om ansökningarna om finansiering för forskaranställningar som forskardoktor. Som sökande får du ett automatiskt meddelande om beslutet per e-post. De projekt som beviljas finansiering listas på vår webbplats på > Beslut & resultat > Finansieringsbeslut. I septemberutlysningen, som avslutades den 25 september 2013, mottog forskningsrådet för hälsa sammanlagt 130 ansökningar om forskaranställning som forskardoktor. Den totala sökta finansieringen uppgick till miljoner euro. Forskningsrådets totala finansiering för forskardoktorer uppgår till ca 4,3 miljoner euro och finansiering beviljas till 16 projekt. Detta betyder att 12 procent av de sökande beviljades finansiering. Finansiering beviljas till: Autio, Anu Kristiina Bimbo, Luis M Ekolle Ndode-Ekane, Xavier Forma, Leena Päivikki Korhonen, Juha Tapio Kublbeck, Jenni Marjaana Latvala, Antti E Pahkala, Katja Annukka Pfisterer, Simon G Richter, Uwe Rinne, Pasi Petteri Erik Sahu, Biswajyoti Strandin, Tomas M Tarkkonen, Kati Maria Verma, Bhupendra Voutilainen, Merja H Forskningsrådet placerade sex ansökningar på en reservlista. Om någon av de sökande som beviljats finansiering inte tar emot eller avstår från en forskaranställning som forskardoktor före den 31 december 2014, kan forskningsrådet i stället välja en sökande från reservlistan för resten av perioden. Forskningsrådets beslut om reservlistan var följande (i den ordning de erbjuds finansiering): 1. Jiu, Yaming 2. Rajala, Kristiina Maria 3. Haukioja, Anna Liisa Kyllikki 4. Järvinen, Tiina 5. Kangas-Kontio, Tiia Maria 6. Lahti, Marius För att finansieringen ska kunna utbetalas krävs att den ansvariga ledaren (dvs. sökande) och forskningsplatsen bekräftar att de tar emot finansieringen. Bekräftelsen ska göras via Akademins e-tjänst senast ). Efter att bekräftelsen är gjord godkänner den ansvariga ledaren och forskningsplatsen finansieringsbeslutets innehåll i sin helhet och förbinder sig till att följa de villkor som Akademin ställt för medelsanvändningen. Beslutsvillkoren presenteras i detalj på webben: Ansökningarna bedömdes av internationella paneler (se bilaga 1) som sammanträdde i januari och februari i Helsingfors. Som stöd i sitt arbete konsulterade panelerna vid behov övriga sakkunniga, såsom

4 medlemmar av andra paneler eller utomstående experter. Panelerna diskuterade igenom varje ansökan, gav betyg och utarbetade ett skriftligt utlåtande. Utlåtandena kan läsas i Akademins e-tjänst genom att logga in på den egna profilen. Panelmedlemmarna svarar gemensamt för utlåtandet. Utvärderingspanelerna bedömde att den vetenskapliga kvaliteten hos ansökningarna i allmänhet var god. De högst värderade ansökningarna ansågs konkurrenskraftiga på en internationell nivå. Panelerna gjorde en sammanfattning av forskningsplanernas vetenskapliga kvalitet (se bilaga 2) för att lyfta fram allmänna och ofta förekommande faktorer som inverkar på forskningsplaners kvalitet. Betygsfördelningen för forskardoktorsansökningar, septemberutlysningen 2013 (130 ansökningar) Rating scale Outstanding 5 Excellent 4 Very good 3 Good 2 Unsatisfactory 1 Weak All projects Funded projects Vid genomgången av ansökningarna fäste forskningsrådet för hälsa särskild uppmärksamhet vid panelernas utlåtanden. Vid finansieringsbesluten var den vetenskapliga kvaliteten hos ansökningarna det viktigaste kriteriet. För vetenskapligt jämbördiga ansökningar beaktades också olika forskningsområdens behov och frågor som rör god vetenskaplig praxis och immateriella rättigheter. Om du har frågor eller kommentarer gällande utlysningen kan du kontakta oss per telefon eller e-post. Heikki Vilen Vetenskapsrådgivare, hälsoforskning tfn heikki.vilen@aka.fi BILAGOR: Bilaga 1. Panelernas sammansättning Bilaga 2. Respons från panelerna (på engelska)

5 ACADEMY OF FINLAND Research Council for Health 4 June 2014 TO APPLICANTS FOR POSTDOCTORAL FUNDING (September 2013 call) Dear applicant, At its meeting on 4 June 2014, the Research Council for Health of the Academy of Finland decided on the funding for research posts as Postdoctoral Researchers. As an applicant, you will receive an automatic notification of the decision. The projects that will receive funding are listed on our website at Decisions & Impacts > Funding decisions. By the call deadline of 25 September 2013, the Research Council for Health received a total of 130 applications for Academy Project funding. The total funding applied for amounted to EUR 34.7 million. The Research Council decided to grant funding worth EUR 4.3 million to a total of 16 projects. This corresponds to a 12 per cent success rate for applications. Applicants granted funding: Autio, Anu Kristiina Bimbo, Luis M Ekolle Ndode-Ekane, Xavier Forma, Leena Päivikki Korhonen, Juha Tapio Kublbeck, Jenni Marjaana Latvala, Antti E Pahkala, Katja Annukka Pfisterer, Simon G Richter, Uwe Rinne, Pasi Petteri Erik Sahu, Biswajyoti Strandin, Tomas M Tarkkonen, Kati Maria Verma, Bhupendra Voutilainen, Merja H The Research Council placed six applications on a reserve list. If an applicant who was granted funding decides not to accept, or decides to give up, a research post as Postdoctoral Researcher before 31 December 2014, projects placed on the reserve list can be offered funding (in order of precedence on the list). The Research Council decided to draw up a reserve list in the following order of precedence: 1. Jiu, Yaming 2. Rajala, Kristiina Maria 3. Haukioja, Anna Liisa Kyllikki 4. Järvinen, Tiina 5. Kangas-Kontio, Tiia Maria 6. Lahti, Marius Before the funds can be paid, the principal investigator (i.e. the applicant) and the site of research must confirm that they will receive the funding. The confirmation must be done in the Academy s online services by 13 August After confirming that they will receive the funding, the PI and the site of research must accept the whole funding decision and commit themselves to complying with the conditions set by the Academy for the use of funds. The conditions for Academy funding decisions are presented at The applications were reviewed in international expert panels (Appendix 1), which convened in Helsinki in January and February. In their work, the panels consulted other experts where necessary, either members of another panel or external experts. The panel discussed, rated and issued a written review report on each application. You can read the expert review issued on your own application by logging in to the Academy s online services with your user ID. All panel members are jointly responsible for the review report issued by the panel.

6 The evaluation panels found the scientific quality of the applications overall good. The applications scored with the highest grades were found competitive on an international level. The panels summarised the scientific quality of research plans and highlighted general points concerning the scientific quality of research plans (Appendix 2). Score distribution for Postdoctoral Researcher applications, September 2013 call (130 applications) Rating scale Outstanding 5 Excellent 4 Very good 3 Good 2 Unsatisfactory 1 Weak All projects Funded projects The Research Council for Health examined the applications, paying special attention to the panel reviews. In making the funding decisions, the most important criterion was the scientific quality of the applications. For applications evaluated as equals scientifically, the Research Council also took into account the needs of different disciplines as well as issues of good scientific practice and IPR. If you have any questions or comments concerning this call, please contact the Academy by phone or . Heikki Vilen Science Adviser, Health Research p heikki.vilen@aka.fi APPENDICES Appendix 1. Composition of expert panels Appendix 2. Feedback from the panels

7 Liite 1 Bilaga 1 Appendix 1 Grant review panels Research Council of Health September 2013 call (Academy Projects, Academy Research Fellows, Postdoctoral Researchers, Clinical Researchers, Finnish-Japanese joint call in medical genomics, MEC-funded call on sport science) Panel 1 Professor Lightowlers, Robert, Newcastle University, UK Professor Brand, Thomas, Imperial College London, UK Professor Cuppen, Edwin, Hubrecht Institute and University Medical Center Utrecht, Netherlands Professor Gauguier, Dominique, INSERM, France Professor van der Maarel, Silvere, Leiden University Medical Center, Netherlands Dr Saada, Ann, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Israel Professor Speicher, Michael, Medical University of Graz, Austria Professor Veltman, Joris, Radboud University Medical Center, Netherlands Professor Worthington, Jane, University of Manchester, UK External reviewer: Professor de Knijff, Peter, Leiden University Medical Center, Netherlands Panel 2 Professor van Leeuwen, Hans, Erasmus, Netherlands Professor Arsenijevic, Yvan, University of Lausanne and Fondation Asile des Aveugles, Switzerland Professor Bulleid, Neil, University of Glasgow, UK Professor Helms, Bernd, Utrecht University, Netherlands Professor Kadler, Karl, University of Manchester, UK Professor Petrie, John, University of Glasgow, UK Professor Schenke-Layland, Katja, University Tübingen, Germany Professor Stojkovic, Miodrag, University of Kragujevac, Serbia Professor Haanen, John, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Netherlands Professor Duchen, Michael, University College London, UK Panel 3 Professor Isacke, Clare, Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, UK Professor Carles, Joan, University Hospital Vall Hebron, Spain Professor Gissmann, Lutz, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Germany Professor Haanen, John, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Netherlands Associate Professor Hansen, Lise Lotte, Aarhus Universitet, Denmark Associate Professor Marosi, Christine, Medical University of Vienna, Austria Dr Marra, Giancarlo, University of Zurich, Switzerland Professor Ryan, Anderson, University of Oxford, UK Associate Professor Wiemer, Erik, Erasmus University Medical Center, Netherlands

8 Panel 4 Professor Krombach, Fritz, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany Professor Agerberth, Birgitta, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden Dr Cerf-Bensussan, Nadine, Instituti National de la Santé et de la Recherche, France Dr Durandy, Anne, INSERM, France Professor Geretti, Anna Maria; University of Liverpool, UK Professor Goodbourn, Steve, St George s University of London, UK Professor Hawrylowicz, Catherine, King s College London, UK Dr Lehuen, Agnes, INSERM, France Professor Maiden, Martin, University of Oxford, UK Professor Simmonds, Peter, University of Edinburgh, UK Professor Cuppen, Edwin, Hubrecht Institute and University Medical Center Utrecht, Netherlands Professor Hughes, Francis, King s College London, UK Professor Reichhart, Jean-Marc, University de Strasbourg, France Professor Walters, Matthew, University of Glasgow, UK Professor Worthington, Jane, University of Manchester, UK Panel 5 Professor Shaw, Pamela J, University of Sheffield, UK Professor Amor, Sandra, VU University Medical Center, Netherlands Dr Dodel, Richard, Philipps-University Marburg, Germany Professor Gilhus, Nils Erik, University of Bergen, Norway Associate Professor Kozicz, Tamas, Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands Professor Lundervold, Arvid, University of Bergen, Norway Professor Matthews, Paul, Imperial College London, UK Professor Pasinetti, Giulio, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA Professor Sirén, Anna-Leena, University of Würzburg, Germany Professor Spillantini, Maria, University of Cambridge, UK Panel 6 Professor Frøkjær, Sven, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Professor Caliceti, Paolo, University of Padova, Italy Professor Danielson, Helena, Uppsala Universitet, Sweden Professor Haycock, John, University of Sheffield, UK Professor Hartmann, Rolf, Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research Saarland, Germany Professor Klein, Jochen, Goethe University, Germany Professor Schmidt, Martina, University of Groningen, Netherlands Dean De Smedt, Stefaan, Ghent University, Belgium Professor Sylte, Ingebrigt, University of Tromsø, Norway Associate Professor Vistoli, Giulo, University of Milan, Italy

9 Panel 7 Professor Kinman, Gail, University of Bedfordshire, UK Dr Batty, David, University College London, UK Professor Buntinx, Frank, KU Leuven, Belgium Dr Evans, Jonathan, University of Bristol, UK Professor Friis, Svein, Oslo University Hospital, Norway Professor Hultman, Christina, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden Professor Van Oyen, Herman, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Belgium Professor Rokne, Berit, University of Bergen, Norway Professor Sacker, Amanda, University College London, UK Professor Wagner, Cordula, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research NIVEL, Netherlands External reviewer: Professor Franks, Paul W., Lund University, Sweden Panel 8 Professor Wabitsch, Martin, Division of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Adipocyte Research Laboratory, University of Ulm, Germany Professor Ahlbom, Anders, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden Professor Avenell, Alison, University of Aberdeen, UK Professor Blaut, Michael, German Institute of Human Nutrition, Germany Professor Feskens, Edith, Wageningen University; Netherlands Professor Franks, Paul W., Lund University, Sweden Professor Hoffmann, Barbara, Heinrich Heine University of Düsseldorf, Germany Professor Kafatos, Anthony, University of Crete, Greece Dr Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Denmark Professor Roche, Helen, Conway Institute of Biomolecular & Biomedical Research, Ireland Professor Allen, Ryan, Simon Fraser University, Canada Professor Ownby, Dennis, Georgia Regents University, USA Panel 9 Professor Norman, Jane, University of Edinburgh, UK Professor Aspenberg, Per, Linköpings universitet, Sweden Professor Atar, Dan, Oslo University Hospital, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Norway Professor Casas, Juan P, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK Professor Diez-Perez, Adolfo, Salut Mar. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain Professor Hindmarsh, Peter, University College London, UK Professor Hiort, Olaf, University of Lübeck, Germany Professor Pasterkamp, Gerard, Utrecht University, Netherlands Professor Walters, Matthew, University of Glasgow, UK Professor Burkhard, Fiona, Bern University Hospital, Germany Dr Cerf-Bensussan, Nadine, Instituti National de la Santé et de la Recherche, France

10 Senior Lecturer Grupen, Christopher, University of Sydney, Australia Professor Hughes, Francis, King s College London, UK Dr. van der Ploeg, Hidde, VU University Medical Centre, Netherlands Professor Proctor, Gordon, King s College London Dental Institute, UK Professor Hughes, Francis, King s College London, UK Professor O Brien, Colm, Mater Hospital, Ireland Associate Professor Shaal, Shlomit, University of Louisville School of Medicine, USA Panel 10 Professor Mittnacht, Sibylle, UCL Cancer Institute, UK Professor Dantuma, Nico, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden Professor Etienne-Manneville, Sandrine, Institut Pasteur CNRS, France Dr Gavard, Julie, Institut Cochin CNRS, France Professor Gruenbaum, Yosef, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel Professor Müller, Anne, University of Zurich, Switzerland Professor Olson, Michael, Beatson Institute for Cancer Research, UK Dr Wagner, Erwin F., Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas (CNIO), Spain Panel 11 Professor van Baak, Marleen, Maastricht University, Netherlands Dr Gill, Jason, University of Glasgow, UK Professor Fairclough, Stuart, Liverpool John Moores University, UK Professor emeritus Hopman-Rock, Marijke, Body@Work Research Center TNO and VU University Medical Center, Netherlands Professor Newham, Di, King s College London, UK Associate Professor Overgaard, Kristian, Aarhus University, Denmark Senior Researcher van der Ploeg, Hidde, VU University Medical Centre, Netherlands Professor Schelbert, Heinrich, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, USA Associate Professor Sebe, Niculae, University of Trento, Italy Professor Skelton, Dawn, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK Panel 12 Professor Armour, Kathleen, University of Birmingham, UK Professor Cardon, Greet, Ghent University, Belgium Professor Ellaway, Anne, Medical Research Council University of Glasgow, UK Professor Memmert, Daniel, German Sport University, Germany Associate Professor Ottesen, Laila, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Professor Scheerder, Jeroen, University of Leuven, Belgium Professor Newham, Di, King s College London, UK Professor Shaw, Pamela J, University of Sheffield, UK

11 Liite 2 Bilaga 2 Appendix 2 September 2013 call, applications submitted to the Research Council for Health Feedback from the review panel members to the applicants The scientific quality of the applications in general was similar to that of other countries. The very best were clearly of a high quality and internationally competitive. However, there was a broad range in the quality of the applications. The panels observed some common weaknesses, addressing which would significantly improve most applications: Often, the research plans were not well structured and they needed improvement. Many plans lacked cohesion to a greater or lesser extent. The different parts of the plan have to interact with each other and with one or more overall objectives. Too often there were not enough details to judge the feasibility of the proposed projects. Preliminary data should be included into the plan in order for the panel to assess the feasibility of a research plan. Although it is important to give a suitable background, many research plans had too long background sections. The reviewers are particularly interested in the justifications and methodology of the current proposal (also data analyses). There was frequently a lack of linkages between the research questions and the research methods. There were several applications where the ideas appeared to be novel and of a very high standard, but the plans were poorly structured, unfocused and not always clear as to the aims or hypotheses. The statistical and data analysis plans were often inadequate. A common issue was the lack of suitable power calculations. In many research plans, they were simply absent; in others they were inadequate. Even one critical omission such as this will reduce the opportunity for funding. A big problem is the overambition of several projects, an unrealistic view of what can be done during the funding period. Often, less is more with a research plan! Furthermore, the plans were too often more like a collection of studies or a large research programme than having a clearly defined and focused goal with a well-planned schedule for the funding period. More emphasis is needed on what will be done in this particular proposal during the funding period and by whom, instead of what has been already done. It is also important to clearly indicate the data that have already been obtained and differentiate this from what is in process, and what will be done in the future. This will avoid confusion. International collaborations and mobility plans were often mentioned without coherent arguments why these have been chosen or planned. The panel members encourage researchers to publish in higher-ranking journals. To summarise, the applicants can become more competitive by international standards by writing a focused research plan with clearly defined goal and hypotheses, providing rationales and details for the methods, describing in detail the power calculations and data analyses and also by giving justifications for collaborations.