SUOMEN AKATEMIA Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta

Transkriptio

1 SUOMEN AKATEMIA Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta TERVEYDEN TUTKIMUKSEN TOIMIKUNNALTA AKATEMIATUTKIJAN TEHTÄVÄÄ HAKENEILLE (syyskuun 2013 haku) Arvoisa hakija, Suomen Akatemian terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta päätti kokouksessaan rahoitettavista akatemiatutkijahakemuksista. Kaikki akatemiatutkijan tehtävää hakeneet saavat sähköpostiosoitteeseensa viestin päätöksestä. Kukin hakija voi lukea hakemuksestaan saamansa arviointilausunnon käyttäjätunnuksillaan Akatemian verkkoasioinnissa. Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunnalle osoitettiin syyskuun 2013 haussa 94 akatemiatutkijahakemusta. Terveyden tutkimuksen toimikunta päätti kokouksessaan myöntää akatemiatutkijan palkkausrahoituksen ajalle kymmenelle hakijalle. Hakemukset olivat korkeatasoisia, mutta vain 10,6 % hakemuksista voitiin rahoittaa. Tästä johtuen moni erittäin hyvät arviot saanut hakija jäi tälläkin kertaa vaille rahoitusta. Hakemukset arvioitiin kansainvälisissä arviointipaneeleissa (liite 1), jotka kokoontuivat tammihelmikuussa 2014 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. Arviointipaneelit pitivät hakemusten tieteellistä laatua yleisesti hyvänä, parhaita arvosanoja saaneita hankkeita pidettiin kilpailukykyisinä kansainvälisellä tasolla. Arvioidessaan tutkimussuunnitelmien tieteellistä laatua asiantuntijapaneelit kuitenkin nostivat esille yleisiä ja usein toistuvia tutkimussuunnitelmien laatuun vaikuttavia seikkoja (ks. liite 2). Akatemiatutkijahakemusten arvosanojen jakauma (kpl), syyskuun 2013 haku (94 hakemusta) 1 (11)

2 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 hakijan eteneminen tutkijan uralla, liikkuvuus sekä muita asioita, kuten eri tutkimusalojen tarpeet ja hankkeisiin liittyvät hyvään tieteelliseen käytäntöön ja aineettomiin oikeuksiin liittyvät kysymykset. Rahoitetut akatemiatutkijat: Hulmi Juha, Jyväskylän yliopisto Hämäläinen Riikka, Helsingin yliopisto Kilpivaara Outi, Helsingin yliopisto Rantamäki Tomi, Helsingin yliopisto Rilla Kirsi, Itä-Suomen yliopisto Rosenholm Jessica, Åbo Akademi Rysä Jaana, Oulun yliopisto Sierra Lopez Alejandra, Itä-Suomen yliopisto Tammela Päivi, Helsingin yliopisto Wei Gonghong, Oulun yliopisto Rahoituksen maksaminen edellyttää hakijan sekä suorituspaikan vahvistusta rahoituksen vastaanottamisesta Akatemian verkkoasioinnin kautta ( mennessä. Suorituspaikan on otettava tutkija palvelussuhteeseen päätöksen ehtojen mukaisesti. Akatemiatutkijan rahoituksen saaneiden tulee jättää tarkennettu hakemus tutkimuskuluihin mennessä - heille lähetetään yksityiskohtaiset ohjeet sähköpostitse. Mikäli rahoitusta nyt saanut ei ota tehtävää vastaan tai luopuu tehtävästä ennen , voidaan hänen tilalleen ottaa jäljelle jääväksi kaudeksi hakija varalistalta. Varasijalla oleviin otetaan yhteyttä vain, mikäli joku nyt valituista luopuu tehtävästä. Toimikunta päätti varasijalistan järjestyksestä seuraavasti: 1. Ungureanu Daniela, Tampereen yliopisto 2. Greco Dario, Työterveyslaitos 3. Jalava Pasi, Itä-Suomen yliopisto 4. Pulkkinen Ville, Helsingin yliopisto 5. Palin Kimmo, Helsingin yliopisto 6. Huttunen Kati, Itä-Suomen yliopisto Mikäli sinulla on hakuun liittyviä kysymyksiä tai kommentteja, pyydän ottamaan yhteyttä sähköpostitse tai puhelimitse. Aki Salo johtava tiedeasiantuntija Suomen Akatemia, Terveyden tutkimuksen yksikkö, Hakaniemenranta 6, PL 131, Helsinki puh: sähköposti: aki.salo@aka.fi 2 (11)

3 FINLANDS AKADEMI Forskningsrådet för hälsa FÖR DE SOM SÖKT FORSKARANSTÄLLNING SOM AKADEMIFORSKARE (septemberutlysningen 2013) Bästa sökande, Finlands Akademis forskningsråd för hälsa har fattat beslut om finansiering för forskaranställningar som akademiforskare. Alla som har sökt forskaranställning som akademiforskare får ett e- postmeddelande om beslutet. Var och en kan läsa utlåtandet på sin ansökan i Akademins e-tjänst. I Akademins utlysning som stängde i september 2013 mottog forskningsrådet för hälsa sammanlagt 94 ansökningar om forskaranställning som akademiforskare. Forskningsrådet har vid sitt möte den 14 maj 2014 beslutat att bevilja tio sökande finansiering för akademiforskares avlöning för perioden Ansökningarna höll en hög standard och endast 10,6 procent av ansökningarna kunde finansieras. Därför blev många ansökningar som fått en utmärkt bedömning utan finansiering. Ansökningarna bedömdes av internationella paneler (se bilaga 1) som samlades i Helsingfors i januari februari Vid behov utnyttjades andra paneler eller utomstående experter. Panelerna diskuterade igenom varje ansökan, gav betyg och utarbetade ett skriftligt utlåtande. Utlåtandena kan läsas i Akademins e-tjänst. Panelmedlemmarna svarar gemensamt för sitt utlåtande. Enligt panelerna höll ansökningarna en hög standard. De högst rankade ansökningarna ansågs konkurrenskraftiga på en internationell nivå. Panelerna lyfte trots det fram allmänna och ofta förekommande faktorer som inverkar på forskningsplaners kvalitet (se bilaga 2). Betygsfördelning för ansökningar om forskaranställning som akademiforskare (antal), septemberutlysningen 2013 (94 ansökningar) 3 (11)

4 Vid genomgången av ansökningarna fäste forskningsrådet för hälsa särskilt avseende vid panelernas utlåtanden. Vid fattandet av finansieringsbesluten var den vetenskapliga kvaliteten hos ansökningarna det viktigaste kriteriet. För vetenskapligt jämbördiga ansökningar beaktades också den sökandes forskarkarriär, mobilitet, olika vetenskapsområdens behov och frågor som rör god vetenskaplig praxis och immateriella rättigheter. Finansiering beviljas till: Hulmi Juha, Jyväskylän universitet Hämäläinen Riikka, Helsingfors universitet Kilpivaara Outi, Helsingfors universitet Rantamäki Tomi, Helsingfors universitet Rilla Kirsi, Östra-Finlands univeristet Rosenholm Jessica, Åbo Akademi Rysä Jaana, Uleåborgs universitet Sierra Lopez Alejandra, Östra-Finlands univeristet Tammela Päivi, Helsingfors universitet Wei Gonghong, Uleåborgs universitet För att finansieringen kan utbetalas krävs att den sökande och forskningsplatsen bekräftar att de tar emot finansieringen. Bekräftelsen ska göras i Akademins e-tjänst ( senast den 6 juni Forskningsplatsen måste anställa forskaren i ett anställningsförhållande i enlighet med beslutsvillkoren. De som beviljats akademiforskarfinansiering ska lämna in en detaljerad ansökan om finansiering för forskningskostnader senast den 6 juni Noggrannare anvisningar om detta skickas per e-post. Om någon av de sökande som beviljats finansiering inte tar emot eller avstår från en forskaranställning som akademiforskare före den 31 december 2014, kan forskningsrådet i stället välja en sökande från reservlistan för resten av perioden. De som placerats på reservlistan kontaktas endast om någon finansieringsmottagare avstår från sin anställning. Forskningsrådets beslut om reservlistan var följande (i den ordning de erbjuds finansiering): 1. Ungureanu Daniela, Tammerfors universitet 2. Greco Dario, Arbetshälsoinstitutet 3. Jalava Pasi, Östra-Finlands univeristet 4. Pulkkinen Ville, Helsingfors universitet 5. Palin Kimmo, Helsingfors universitet 6. Huttunen Kati, Östra-Finlands univeristet Om du har frågor eller kommentarer gällande utlysningen kan du kontakta oss per e-post eller telefon. Aki Salo ledande vetenskapsrådgivare Finlands Akademi, enheten för hälsoforskning Hagnäskajen 6, PB 131, Helsingfors tfn e-post aki.salo@aka.fi 4 (11)

5 ACADEMY OF FINLAND Research Council for Health 14 May 2014 TO APPLICANTS FOR RESEARCH POSTS AS ACADEMY RESEARCH FELLOW (September 2013 call) Dear applicant, At its meeting on 14 May 2014, the Academy of Finland s Research Council for Health decided on funding for research posts as Academy Research Fellow. All applicants will receive an automatic notification of the decision. The reviews on the applications can be read in the Academy s online services. In the September call 2013, the Research Council received a total of 94 applications for research posts as Academy Research Fellow. The Research Council decided to grant Academy Research Fellow salary funding to ten applicants for the period 1 September August The applications were of a high quality but the Research Council could fund only 10.6 per cent of the applications submitted. Consequently, many applicants who received excellent marks could not be granted funding. The applications were peer-reviewed by 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 report on your 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. The panels found the scientific quality of the applications overall good. The applications scored with the highest grades were found competitive on an international level. In reviewing the scientific level of the research plans, the panels, however, highlighted general and recurrent points concerning the scientific quality of research plans (see Appendix 2). Score distribution for applications for research posts as Academy Research Fellow, September 2013 call (94 applications) 5 (11)

6 The Research Council for Health examined the applications, paying special attention to the panel review reports. In making funding decisions, the most important criterion was the scientific quality of the applications. For scientifically equal applications, the Research Council also took into account the applicant s research career, mobility, needs of different disciplines as well as questions of good scientific practice and IPR issues. Applicants granted funding: Hulmi Juha, University of Jyväskylä Hämäläinen Riikka, University of Helsinki Kilpivaara Outi, University of Helsinki Rantamäki Tomi, University of Helsinki Rilla Kirsi, University of Eastern Finland Rosenholm Jessica, Åbo Akademi University Rysä Jaana, University of Oulu Sierra Lopez Alejandra, University of Eastern Finland Tammela Päivi, University of Helsinki Wei Gonghong, University of Oulu Before the funds can be paid, 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 6 June The site of research shall hire the researcher in an employment relationship in accordance with the conditions specified in the decision. The recipients of Academy Research Fellow funding shall submit a detailed application for research costs by 6 June 2014 (detailed guidelines will be sent by ). If an applicant who was granted funding decides not to accept or decides to give up a research post as Academy Research Fellow before 31 December 2014, an applicant placed on the reserve list can be given a substitute position for the rest of the period. Those placed on the reserve list will be contacted only if any of the appointees decides to give up his/her research post. The Research Council decided to draw up a reserve list in the following order of precedence: 1. Ungureanu Daniela, University of Tampere 2. Greco Dario, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health 3. Jalava Pasi, University of Eastern Finland 4. Pulkkinen Ville, University of Helsinki 5. Palin Kimmo, University of Helsinki 6. Huttunen Kati, University of Eastern Finland If you have any questions or comments concerning this call, please contact the Academy by or phone. Aki Salo Senior Science Adviser Academy of Finland, Research Council for Health Hakaniemenranta 6, POB 131, Helsinki tel aki.salo@aka.fi 6 (11)

7 Liite 1/Bilaga 1/Appendix 1 Grant review panel experts Research Council of Health September 2013 call (Academy Projects, Academy Research Fellows, Postdoctoral Researchers, Clinical Researchers, Finnish-Japanese joint call on medical genomics, MEC funded call on sport science) Panel 1 1. Professor Lightowlers, Robert; Newcastle University, UK 2. Professor Brand, Thomas; Imperial College London, UK 3. Professor Cuppen, Edwin; Hubrecht Institute and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands 4. Professor Gauguier, Dominique; INSERM, France 5. Professor van der Maarel, Silvere; Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands 6. Dr. Saada, Ann; Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Israel 7. Professor Speicher, Michael; Medical University of Graz, Austria 8. Professor Veltman, Joris; Radboud University Medical Center, the Netherlands 9. Professor Worthington, Jane; University of Manchester, UK External reviewer: 1. Professor de Knijff, Peter; Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands Panel 2 1. van Leeuwen, Hans; Erasmus, The Netherlands 2. Professor Arsenijevic, Yvan; University of Lausanne and Fondation Asile des Aveugles, Swizerland 3. Professor Bulleid, Neil; University of Glasgow, UK 4. Professor Helms, Bernd; Utrecht University, The Netherlands 5. Professor Kadler, Karl; University of Manchester, UK 6. Professor Petrie, John; University of Glasgow, UK 7. Professor Schenke-Layland, Katja; University Tübingen, Germany 8. Professor Stojkovic, Miodrag; University of Kragujevac, Serbia External reviewer: 1. Professor Haanen, John; Netherlands Cancer Institute, The Netherlands 2. Professor Duchen, Michael; University College London, UK Panel 3 1. Professor Isacke, Clare; Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, UK 2. Service of Oncology Director GU Carles, Joan; University Hospital Vall Hebron, Spain 3. Professor Gissmann, Lutz; Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Germany 4. Head of Medical Oncology Haanen, John; Netherlands Cancer Institute, The Netherlands 5. Associate Professor Hansen, Lise Lotte; Aarhus universitet, Denmark 6. Associate Professor Marosi, Christine; Medical University of Vienna, Austria 7. Dr. Marra, Giancarlo University of Zurich, Swizerland 8. Professor O'Driscoll, Lorraine; Trinity College Dublin, Ireland 9. Professor Ryan, Anderson; University of Oxford, UK 10. Associate Professor Wiemer, Erik; Erasmus University Medical Center, The Netherlands 7 (11)

8 Panel 4 1. Professor Krombach, Fritz; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany 2. Professor Agerberth, Birgitta; Karolinska Institutet, Sweden 3. Dr. Cerf-Bensussan, Nadine; Instituti National de la Santé et de la Recherche, France 4. Researcher Durandy, Anne; INSERM, France 5. Professor Geretti, Anna Maria; University of Liverpool, UK 6. Professor Goodbourn, Steve; St. George's, University of London, UK 7. Professor Hawrylowicz, Catherine; King's College London, UK 8. Dr. Lehuen, Agnes; INSERM U1016; France 9. Professor Maiden, Martin; University of Oxford, UK 10. Professor Simmonds, Peter; University of Edinburgh, UK External reviewers: 1. Professor Cuppen, Edwin; Hubrecht Institute and University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands 2. Profesor Hughes, Francis; King s College London, UK 3. Professor Reichhart, Jean-Marc; University de Strasbourg, France 4. Professor Walters, Matthew; University of Glasgow, UK 5. Professor Worthington, Jane; University of Manchester, UK Panel 5 1. Professor Shaw, Pamela J; University of Sheffield, UK 2. Professor Amor, Sandra; VU University Medical Center, The Netherlands 3. MD; Dodel, Richard; Philipps-University Marburg, Germany 4. Professor Gilhus, Nils Erik; University of Bergen, Norway 5. Associate Professor Kozicz, Tamas; Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands 6. Professor Lundervold, Arvid; University of Bergen, Norway 7. Professor Matthews, Paul; Imperial College London, UK 8. Professor Pasinetti, Giulio; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA 9. Professor Sirén, Anna-Leena; University of Würzburg, Germany 10. Professor Spillantini, Maria Grazia; University of Cambridge, UK Panel 6 1. Professor Frøkjær, Sven; University of Copenhagen, Denmark 2. Professor Caliceti, Paolo; University of Padova, Italy 3. Professor Danielson, Helena; Uppsala Universitet, Sweden 4. Professor Haycock, John W; University of Sheffield, UK 5. Director Hartmann, Rolf W.; Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research Saarland (HIPS), Germany 6. Professor Klein, Jochen; Goethe University, Germany 7. Professor Schmidt, Martina; University of Groningen, The Netherlands 8. Dean De Smedt, Stefaan; Ghent University Belgium, Belgium 9. Professor Sylte, Ingebrigt; University of Tromsø, Norway 10. Associate Professor Vistoli, Giulo; University of Milan, Italy 8 (11)

9 Panel 7 1. Professor Kinman, Gail; University of Bedfordshire, UK 2. Reader Dr Batty, David; University College London, UK 3. Professor Buntinx, Frank; KU Leuven, Belgium 4. Senior Lecturer Dr Evans, Jonathan; University of Bristol, UK 5. Professor Friis, Svein; Oslo University Hospital, Norway 6. Professor Hultman, Christina; Karolinska Institutet, Sweden 7. Professor Van Oyen, Herman; Scientific Institute of Public Health, Belgium 8. Professor Rokne, Berit; University of Bergen, Norway 9. Professor Sacker, Amanda; University College London, UK 10. Professor Wagner, Cordula; Netherlands institute for health services research NIVEL, The Netherlands External reviewer: 1. Professor Franks, Paul W.; Lund University, Sweden Panel 8 1. Professor Wabitsch, Martin; Division of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Adipocyte Research Laboratory, University of Ulm, Germany 2. Professor Ahlbom, Anders; Karolinska Institutet, Sweden 3. Professor Avenell, Alison; University of Aberdeen, UK 4. Professor Blaut, Michael; German Institute of Human Nutrition, Germany 5. Professor Feskens, Edith; Wageningen University; The Netherlands 6. Professor Franks, Paul W.; Lund University, Sweden 7. Professor Kafatos, Anthony; University of Crete, Greece 8. Professor Hoffmann, Barbara; Heinrich Heine University of Düsseldorf, Germany 9. Dr. Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole; Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Denmark 10. Professor Roche, Helen; Conway Institute of Biomolecular & Biomedical Research, Ireland Panel 9 1. Professor Norman, Jane; University of Edinburgh, UK 2. Professor Aspenberg, Per; Linköpings universitet, Sweden 3. Professor Atar, Dan; Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Norway 4. Professor Casas, Juan P; London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK 5. Professor Diez-Perez, Adolfo; Salut Mar. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain 6. Professor Hindmarsh, Peter; University College London, UK 7. Professor Hiort, Olaf; University of Lübeck, Germany 8. Professor Pasterkamp, Gerard; Utrecht University, The Netherlands 9. Professor Walters, Matthew; University of Glasgow, UK External reviewers: 1. Professor Burkhard, Fiona; Bern University Hospital, Germany 2. Dr. Cerf-Bensussan, Nadine; Instituti National de la Santé et de la Recherche, France 3. Senior Lecturer Grupen, Christopher; University of Sydney, Australia 4. Professor Hughes, Francis; King s College London, UK 9 (11)

10 5. Senior Researcher van der Ploeg, Hidde; VU University Medical Centre, Dept. of Public & Occupational Health, The Netherlands 6. Professor Proctor, Gordon; King's College London Dental Institute, UK 7. Professor Hughes, Francis; King s College London, UK 8. Professor O Brien, Colm; Mater Hospital, Ireland 9. Associate Professor Shaal, Shlomit; University of Louisville School of Medicine, USA Panel Professor Mittnacht, Sibylle; UCL Cancer Institute cancer, UK 2. Professor Dantuma, Nico; Karolinska Institutet, Sweden 3. Professor Sandrine, Etienne-Manneville; Institut Pasteur CNRS, France 4. Dr. Gavard, Julie; Institut Cochin CNRS, France 5. Professor Gruenbaum, Yosef; The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel 6. Professor Müller, Anne; University of Zurich, Swizerland 7. Professor Olson, Michael; Beatson Institute for Cancer Research, UK 8. Dr. Wagner, Erwin F.; Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas (CNIO), Spain Panel Professor van Baak, Marleen; Maastricht University, The Netherlands 2. Dr Gill, Jason; University of Glasgow, UK 3. Professor Fairclough, Stuart; Liverpool John Moores University, UK 4. Professor emeritus Hopman-Rock, Marijke; Body@Work research center TNO and VU university medical center, The Netherlands 5. Professor Newham, Di; King's College London, UK 6. Associate Professor Overgaard, Kristian; Aarhus University, Denmark 7. Senior Researcher van der Ploeg, Hidde; VU University Medical Centre, Dept. of Public & Occupational Health, The Netherlands External reviewer: 1. Professor Schelbert, Heinrich; Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, USA 2. Associate Professor Sebe, Niculae; University of Trento, Italy 3. Professor Skelton, Dawn; Glasgow Caledonian University, UK Panel Professor Armour, Kathleen; University of Birmingham, UK 2. Professor Cardon, Greet; Ghent University, Belgium 3. Professor Ellaway, Anne; Medical Research Council University of Glasgow, UK 4. Professor Memmert, Daniel; German Sport University, Germany 5. Associate Professor Ottesen, Laila; University of Copenhagen, Denmark 6. Professor Scheerder, Jeroen; University of Leuven, Belgium External reviewers: 1. Professor Newham, Di; King's College London, UK 2. Professor Shaw, Pamela J; University of Sheffield, UK 10 (11)

11 Liite 2/Bilaga 2/Appendix 2 September 2013 call applications submitted to Research Council for Health Feedback from the grant review panel members to the applicants Scientific quality of the applications in general was similar to that of other countries. The very best were clearly of 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 to 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 linkage 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 aims or hypotheses. - The statistical and data analyses plans were often inadequate. A common issue is the lack of suitable power calculations. In many research plans they were simply absent, and in others they were not adequate. Even one critical omission such as this will reduce the opportunity for funding. - A big problem is the over-ambition 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 well-planned time 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 plan 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 summarize, the applicants can become more competitive by international standards by writing a focused research plan with clearly defined goal and hypotheses, providing rationale and details for the methods, describing in detail the power calculations and data analyses and also by giving justification for collaborations. 11 (11)