What are some pitfalls in application preparation that are commonly seen in the BCRP peer review process?
A. For career development applications, especially postdocs, we see problems of too many aims, not enough mentor input to better organize the research plan, too many spelling errors and sloppy editing, and insufficient effort to plan career goals directed at breast cancer. The PI should write the abstracts, research plan, and associated text, but the mentor should give guidance. Form 17 (Career Development) is critical for both the peer and programmatic reviews, so spend some time working on it!
Related Questions
- Donors already have indicators to assess the application of GHD, like the peer review process. Isn’t this enough?
- What are some pitfalls in application preparation that are commonly seen in the BCRP peer review process?
- What are some application problems that are commonly revealed in the CBCRP peer review process?
