Issue Cover

  • Previous Issue
  • Previous Article
  • Next Article

Preparation of the Investigator for a Proposal

The research proposal, insights into the reviewer's perspective, conclusions, writing successful research proposals for medical science  .

(Schwinn) Professor of Anesthesiology and Surgery; Associate Professor of Pharmacology/Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center; Senior Fellow, Duke Pepper Aging Center.

(DeLong) Associate Professor, Division of Biometry and Medical Informatics, Duke University Medical Center.

(Shafer) Staff Anesthesiologist, Palo Alto VA Health Care System; Associate Professor of Anesthesia, Stanford University.

  • Split-Screen
  • Article contents
  • Figures & tables
  • Supplementary Data
  • Peer Review
  • Open the PDF for in another window
  • Cite Icon Cite
  • Get Permissions
  • Search Site

Debra A. Schwinn , Elizabeth R. DeLong , Steven L. Shafer; Writing Successful Research Proposals for Medical Science   . Anesthesiology 1998; 88:1660–1666 doi:

Download citation file:

  • Ris (Zotero)
  • Reference Manager

HIGH-QUALITY research proposals are required to obtain funds for the basic and clinical sciences. In this era of diminishing revenues, the ability to compete successfully for peer-reviewed research money is essential to create and maintain scientific programs. Ideally, the essentials of “grantsmanship” are learned through observation and participation in grant preparation, but the training environment experienced by most physicians typically focuses on clinical skills. Most physicians are never exposed to a research environment and therefore do not learn how to write grants. The result is that many clinical studies, even when designed by skilled clinicians and those that address important clinical questions, often do not compete successfully with proposals written by basic scientists. This creates a perception that clinical studies are not favorably viewed by research review committees. The opposite is probably closer to the truth; research review committees are very keen to fund excellent clinical research. Although greater numbers of researchers with Ph.D. degrees have applied for National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants compared with researchers with M.D. degrees over the last 10 yr, funding rates (percent applications funded) have remained approximately the same for these investigators ( Figure 1 ; 1995 success rates: all degrees, 6,759 [26.8%]; M.D. - Ph.D., 370 [23.1%]; M.D., 1,518 [28.1%]; Ph.D., 4,746 [26.8%]; other degree, 125 [23.1%]).[section]

Figure 1. Overall success rates for NIH funding of scientific applications, 1986 - 1995. No difference in funding rate is observed between applicants holding M.D. versus Ph.D. degrees. As the success rate for first-time applications was 11.3% in 1993, it is apparent that resubmission of a revised application significantly increases the overall chance of having research proposal ultimately funded.[section]

Figure 1. Overall success rates for NIH funding of scientific applications, 1986 - 1995. No difference in funding rate is observed between applicants holding M.D. versus Ph.D. degrees. As the success rate for first-time applications was 11.3% in 1993, it is apparent that resubmission of a revised application significantly increases the overall chance of having research proposal ultimately funded.[section]

Capable medical researchers ultimately write research proposals for funding by the NIH. Standards of excellence for NIH grants are high (only the top [almost equal to] 20% of grants are funded). Research questions posed must be hypothesis driven; the investigator must be qualified to perform the study; and preliminary evidence should be presented demonstrating that the research is feasible and will answer the questions posed. The goal of this article is to review important elements of successful research proposals, with emphasis on funding sources available to the anesthesiology community. Two important anesthesia-specific organizations exist to support anesthesia research - The Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research (FAER, an organization under the auspices of the American Society of Anesthesiologists) and the International Anesthesiology Research Society (IARS).

Successful applications for research support from FAER and IARS have many of the characteristics of grants funded by the NIH and other peer-reviewed funding sources. These characteristics include (1) a highly qualified investigator(s);(2) for junior investigators, a mentor with a successful track record in scientific investigation, peer-reviewed funding, and mentorship of fellows and faculty;(3) a supportive academic environment; and (4) a scientifically sound proposal. Each of these characteristics is discussed in the subsequent sections.

Training of the Investigator

One of the most important components of a successful research proposal is a well-trained investigator. Training in clinical anesthesia is not training in research methodology or scientific thinking; it does not prepare an individual for a career in investigation. Although obvious for basic science research, clinical research also requires commitment of a minimum of 1 yr of dedicated training with a good mentor, and more typically 2 - 3 yr in the field of the proposed research. The applicant also needs to demonstrate commitment to a career in investigation. Several years of scientific training is the first demonstration of such commitment. Research proposals must document institutional support for nonclinical time, and the investigator must provide evidence that this time has been used wisely and will continue to be dedicated to the proposed research.

The research proposal must document a track record of productivity by the investigator. This expectation increases as the training and career of the investigator progresses. Fellowship awards do not have an expectation of prior research training, so publications from prior research are not expected. At the fellowship level, outstanding letters of recommendation, undergraduate and medical school performance, and related accomplishments are most important. Because previous training is not required of the fellowship applicant, prior success of the mentor (publications and track record with previous trainees) weighs heavily in the fellowship review. For junior faculty, peer-reviewed publications are expected from the fellowship period. Young Investigator Annoucements (from FAER) and several new IARS awards require several years as a successful junior faculty member, so expectations of demonstrated research success are further increased. The investigator must demonstrate (1) rigorous training, (2) commitment to research, (3) an appropriate career path, and (4) a track record of productive work. None of these are trivial issues, and none can be easily accomplished without making a commitment to research early in the academic career.

The quality of the mentor is another important aspect of awards granted to fellows and junior faculty. Identification of a mentor is explicitly required for FAER and certain junior level NIH grant applications. First and foremost, the mentor must be a successful investigator. Criteria for this include a track record of publication in the area of the proposed research, continued peer-reviewed funding, and a history of successfully training young investigators. Although mentorship is not considered heavily in more senior grant applications, input from a more experienced investigator often remains beneficial throughout one's career (as we can personally attest to). In addition to the mentor, high-quality coinvestigators, collaborators, and consultants also play important roles in strengthening a research proposal.


Good research is best accomplished in a supportive, cooperative environment. Because of the changing climate of clinical medicine, researchers (both clinical and basic science) face increasing pressure to minimize research time. It is not possible to become a successful investigator in one's spare time. Documentation of adequate nonclinical time for research (not for committee meetings or other unrelated tasks) is essential. Receiving funding at a junior level often enables the department to match funds or to guarantee nonclinical time to the budding investigator. In general, the more non-clinical time available to an investigator, the more competitive the application.

Other important elements of the environment include people, space, and institutional resources. People include mentors, consultants who can help with specific methodologies, statistical support, helpful colleagues, experienced technicians, a clinical research team, and a dedicated chairperson. There must be adequate space for performing the proposed studies, office space for research personnel, and storage space for equipment and supplies. Institutional resources include related departmental and interdepartmental seminar series, a critical mass of investigators in a related area, instrument development and repair shops, and necessary laboratory space and common facilities.

Criteria for a sound research proposal are the same whether the proposal is submitted to NIH, FAER, IARS, or other funding sources. In crafting a proposal, it is essential to consider the perspective of the reviewer; therefore, items of interest to the reviewer are listed after general definition of the grant proposal.

Review committees receive dozens of grants. NIH study sections may review as many as 150 proposals during one session. Typically, only two or three reviewers are assigned to read each grant in detail, but everyone is expected to read each abstract. Hence, the abstract is often one of the most important parts of the research proposal. The abstract should address the significance of the question and the overall topic, state the hypothesis, and point out key preliminary data. Additionally, the abstract should provide a synopsis of methodologies planned. In the end, the reviewer must be convinced that the applicant is uniquely (or ideally) suited to undertake this important study by the end of this concise paragraph.

Body of the Grant

Specific Aims. The specific aims section is critically important in a scientific proposal. It is here that the investigator crystallizes the overall goal of the research and states specific hypotheses.

Beginning with the specific aims, the proposal must be well written and logically organized. A poorly organized grant application is difficult to review, even if the science is otherwise excellent. Typically, the specific aims begin with a short introduction (one paragraph), followed by a formally stated hypothesis. The hypothesis must be answerable by the research methods proposed. Generally, two or three specific aims are outlined with subheadings where appropriate. Organization of the specific aims is often temporal, starting with a proposed mechanism or the first set of studies in a clinical project. In general, the specific aims section should be no longer than one page.

Background and Significance. The background section provides an opportunity to bring reviewers up to date on current research in the area of the proposal. This section should summarize succinctly studies from the literature and related work published by the investigator. The most crucial aspect of the background is to build a case for significance of the proposed research regarding the ultimate clinical application or mechanistic understanding. Ideally, the background section should demonstrate that the current proposal is a logical extension of previous studies in the field and will provide new information and novel insights. In general, the background section should be about one fourth of the length of the grant proposal.

Preliminary Data. Preliminary data provide the opportunity for the investigator to demonstrate his or her ability to perform the proposed research. The goal in presenting preliminary data is to convince the reviewer that the investigator is capable of performing the proposed studies and that the mechanisms proposed are plausible. Good preliminary data support novel (or even unlikely) hypotheses. Each experimental method proposed should be accompanied by preliminary data demonstrating facility and expertise with related preparations. For example, if the investigator proposes using a specific electrophysiologic technique to study an ion channel, evidence demonstrating that this technique has been used by the investigator with other ion channels and a Figure showingresults from pilot experiments on the channel of interest would suffice. In clinical studies, demonstration of a working investigative team and the ability to enroll a given number of patients per week is helpful. Figures or tables help to convey the message in a succinct manner. They also conserve space in the proposal and create a more impressive effect. Although it is best if the applicant has generated his or her own preliminary data, for training awards, preliminary data from the mentor's laboratory is entirely appropriate. An effective way to organize preliminary data is to present it in the same order as the specific aims (e.g., C.1 preliminary data corresponds to A.1 specific aims, C.2 preliminary data corresponds to A.2 specific aims, etc.). Presentation of preliminary data usually takes about one fourth to one third of the length of the grant application.

Methods. The methods are the guts of the research proposal. Unfortunately, many investigators run out of steam by the time they reach the methods, leaving reviewers unconvinced by the proposed methodology. Ideally, the model being investigated should be broken down into simple, logical components, each accompanied by a description of specific experiments/interventions to be performed. The investigator should assume that at least one reviewer is an expert in each method presented. Therefore, enough detail should be provided to convince an expert that the experiment or technique is being performed properly. Methods presented as a list of recipes, requiring the reviewer to guess which method applies to each study, are recipes for disaster. Individual experimental techniques should be state of the art. In addition, approaching a problem from several angles is often helpful. “Lingo” of the field should be avoided; it is very annoying to reviewers to have to look up unexplained abbreviations or to have models alluded to rather than described. For training grants, methods should involve techniques currently being performed in the laboratory of the mentor. An effective way to organize the methods section is to follow the same order as the preliminary data and specific aims sections (e.g., D.1 methods corresponds to C.1 preliminary data and A.1 specific aims, etc.).

The methods sections should include a description of the design, conduct, and analysis of each study being proposed. Common errors in design include lack of specification of primary outcome, lack of randomization or blinding in clinical trials, inadequate justification of sample size, failure to adjust the total study number for expected dropouts/failed experiments or patient refusal, and use of single drug doses or concentrations rather than development of dose - response or concentration - response relations. Common errors in conducting research include lack of confirmation of drug concentrations, inadequate reproducibility of final results, lack of standardization of procedures, inadequate follow-up, incomplete data recording, and overall lack of organization.

Inadequate or inappropriate statistical methods can be a major weakness of a grant proposal. Many investigators feel confident with all aspects of their methods except the statistical section. Because statistical issues underlie the design and analysis strategy for every study, the input of a biostatistician is essential in planning the research and writing the grant application. Statistical considerations include specification of the primary end points that drive power calculations. Common statistical errors in research proposals include lack of sample size/power calculations, treating continuous variables as dichotomous, repeated t tests when a more comprehensive modeling approach should be taken, application of statistical tests that assume normality without verifying assumptions, failure to consider covariate effects, and failure to distinguish between interindividual and intraindividual variability. The investigator should be familiar with the concept of statistical power and be prepared to estimate some of the quantities needed to formulate an alternative hypothesis appropriately. The statistical analysis should be clearly outlined with specific methodology directed toward the hypotheses of the study. A statistical reviewer is unlikely to be convinced by a statement that “appropriate statistical methodology will be used” or by a barrage of nonspecific statistical jargon. At least one full paragraph (and sometimes an entire page) of the research proposal should be devoted to statistical analysis. Often several smaller statistics sections are appropriately included after each method is presented.

Even the best methods have potential problems and weaknesses. It is critical that the methods section discuss potential problems that may be encountered during the study and state how the investigator proposes to deal with these problems creatively. Reviewers tend to be impressed when the investigator presents potential problems that never occurred to them, because it suggests that the investigator is an expert in this area of research. A time line and organizational plan (who will be responsible for what) should also be included in the methods section so the reviewers can determine whether the investigator is being realistic in his or her approach. The methods section is typically one third to one half of the length of the entire grant proposal.

Introduction to Revised Application. Because so few grant applications are funded on their first submission (11.5% in 1993), the new investigator should not be unduly alarmed if his or her application is not funded. When a grant application has been unsuccessful, an investigator should revise the application and reapply, even if the original score was “noncompetitive”(meaning the grant was in the lower 50% of applications). Often the reviewers suggest key changes that will improve the application significantly. When submitting a revised application, an introduction (placed before the specific aims section) is used to discuss how criticisms of the original grant have been addressed in the revised proposal. Because the reviewer's comments are intended to be helpful, it is important to address each concern carefully in the revised proposal (changed text should be highlighted in the revised application by italic, bold, or identifying lines in the margin), with changes outlined in the introduction section. Angry responses to reviewers do not facilitate funding of the revised application. Remember that reviewers usually have a copy of the prior review, and they expect corrections or, when appropriate, an explanation of why you have chosen not to incorporate some suggestions from a prior review. Time taken to revise an application is well spent; as Figure 1 demonstrates, investigators who persist in revising and resubmitting their applications have an increased chance ([almost equal to] 20% with no previous NIH support, [almost equal to] 35% if previously funded) of ultimately being funded.[section]

In writing a research grant, it is helpful to consider the reviewer's perspective. Key features considered by reviewers include significance, approach, and feasibility. It is wise for the investigator to reread his or her application before submission with these features in mind. The NIH recently has published two documents on-line that discuss review criteria; examination of these documents before submission of a research proposal may prove helpful. These include the Report of the Committee on Rating Grant Applications[double vertical bar] and Review Criteria for Rating Unsolicited Research Grants.#


First and foremost, is the investigator asking an important question? There are two general ways research studies can be significant. The first is to demonstrate clinical significance. The litmus test for clinical significance is whether the proposed research will improve patient care. The second is elucidation of fundamental mechanisms underlying disease or biologic processes. The ideal research question succeeds in being significant in both areas.

The reviewer assesses whether the research plan can support or refute the stated hypothesis. In addition, the reviewer assesses whether the methodologies used provide adequate or, better yet, elegant approaches to the problem. Recently, the NIH has mandated an increasing emphasis on innovation in research. [1] **

Review committees generally are composed of individuals with expertise in many scientific areas. Additionally, study sections often retain outside reviewers with expertise in the proposed research area. The investigator should assume that his or her methods will be critiqued by at least one expert. Therefore, the investigator should not propose a method that would strike the world's expert in the field as being simplistic, inappropriate, or nonsensical, because the world's expert just might be one of the reviewers. Conversely, some reviewers do not have expertise in the proposed area of research. To ensure that the nonexpert is convinced of the validity and importance of proposed methodologies, the overall proposal should be written with a logical flow of ideas that build from basic to sophisticated concepts. Beginning each portion of the methods section with a short introduction for the nonexpert, followed by a more detailed description of the proposed methods, is an effective strategy to address the needs of both expert and nonexpert reviewers.


The investigator must convince reviewers that the chosen approach is feasible. Preliminary data provide the best demonstration of feasibility. Feasibility is often demonstrated by a track record of publications or peer-reviewed grant support for the applicant or mentor using the proposed experimental approach. Feasibility also can be demonstrated by appropriate statistical analysis of the proposal. For example, a power analysis and corresponding data on the number of patients with the required characteristics at the investigator's institution helps convince reviewers that a clinical study is feasible.

Anesthesiology Funding Sources

Funding for research performed by anesthesiologists is available from many sources. Because the discipline of anesthesiology overlaps many other fields, anesthesiologists have the opportunity to apply for research funds from agencies as diverse as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association (national and local), American Thoracic Society, American Society for Regional Anesthesiology, critical care societies, Department of Veterans Affairs, National Science Foundation, Shriners, Society for Cardiovascular Anesthesiology, Society for Obstetrics and Perinatology, National Aeronautics and Space Aviation, NIH, and many other private foundations. Grants from FAER and IARS are available specifically to the anesthesiology community.

It is important that anesthesiologists continue to apply for NIH grants. For fiscal year 1996, the NIH awarded 149 research grants (including career development grants, R29, R01, and program project grants) to departments of anesthesiology, totaling $21 million in direct costs ([almost equal to]$31 million in total costs). Because of the diversity of research projects in anesthesiology, these grants were awarded by 14 different institutes, centers, and divisions within the NIH. In analyzing data for three recent review sessions (June 1996, October 1996, and February 1997) from the surgery, anesthesiology, and trauma study section, 26% of anesthesiology applications scored in the top 20th percentile, and 31% scored in the top 25th percentile; clearly no bias exists against anesthesiology in this predominantly surgical study section, at least in this limited sample (Alison Cole, anesthesiology representative for the National Institute of General Medicine Science at the NIH, personal communication, December, 1997). Table 1  

Table 1. Number of Recipients of NIH Research Project Annoucements  

Table 1. Number of Recipients of NIH Research Project Annoucements 

A brief list of funding opportunities available to anesthesiologists early in their career is shown in Table 2 . Several sites are available on the World Wide Web ( Table 3 ) to facilitate access to grant/training resources for anesthesiologists. We have created an additional website ( ), which provides access to more comprehensive lists of funding agencies and direct links to funding sources. This website also contains example grants designed to illustrate the grant writing principles discussed in this article.

Table 2. Potential Funding Sources  

Table 2. Potential Funding Sources 

Table 3. Grant/Training Resources on the WWW  

Table 3. Grant/Training Resources on the WWW 

Successful grant applications require a well-trained investigator who carefully outlines a hypothesis-driven research proposal. Unique to FAER and IARS research committees is that the reviewers are mostly investigators and practicing anesthesiologists. These reviewers fully appreciate the importance of clinical research and enthusiastically support high-quality clinical studies. Although descriptive clinical studies are interesting to practicing clinicians, from a scientific perspective, clinical research must be driven by testable hypotheses. Without a testable hypothesis, clinical research cannot pass the test of adequate significance required for funding.

It is our hope that by demystifying the grant writing and review process that more anesthesiologists will be encouraged to submit proposals for research funding. As part of this effort, we strongly encourage residents and fellows interested in research careers to obtain adequate research training and to apply for appropriate fellowship/junior faculty awards early in their careers.

[section] NIH Extramural Data and Trends, Fiscal Years 1986 - 1995. Bethesda, Office of Reports and Analysis (component of the Office of Extramural Research), National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line and periodically updated. ).

[double vertical bar] Report of the Committee on Rating Grant Applications. Revised 5/17/96. Bethesda, National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line. ).

# Review Criteria for Rating Unsolicited Research Grants. NIH Guide, Vol. 26, No. 22, 6/27/97. Bethesda, National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line. ).

** Brown KS: A winning strategy for grant application: Focus on impact. The Scientist 1997; April 8:13–4

Citing articles via

Most viewed, email alerts, related articles, social media, affiliations.

  • ASA Practice Parameters
  • Online First
  • Author Resource Center
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Rights & Permissions
  • Online ISSN 1528-1175
  • Print ISSN 0003-3022
  • Anesthesiology
  • ASA Monitor

Silverchair Information Systems

  • Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy
  • Manage Cookie Preferences
  • © Copyright 2024 American Society of Anesthesiologists

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base
  • Starting the research process
  • How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on October 12, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on November 21, 2023.

Structure of a research proposal

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:


Literature review.

  • Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organized and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research proposals.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal aims
Show your reader why your project is interesting, original, and important.
Demonstrate your comfort and familiarity with your field.
Show that you understand the current state of research on your topic.
Make a case for your .
Demonstrate that you have carefully thought about the data, tools, and procedures necessary to conduct your research.
Confirm that your project is feasible within the timeline of your program or funding deadline.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

  • Academic style
  • Vague sentences
  • Style consistency

See an example

medical research proposal writing

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

  • Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”
  • Example research proposal #2: “Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use”

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

  • The proposed title of your project
  • Your supervisor’s name
  • Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

  • Introduce your topic
  • Give necessary background and context
  • Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

  • Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
  • How much is already known about the topic
  • What is missing from this current knowledge
  • What new insights your research will contribute
  • Why you believe this research is worth doing

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

  • Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
  • Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
  • Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

Building a research proposal methodology
? or  ? , , or research design?
, )? ?
, , , )?

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

  • Improving best practices
  • Informing policymaking decisions
  • Strengthening a theory or model
  • Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
  • Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

Example research schedule
Research phase Objectives Deadline
1. Background research and literature review 20th January
2. Research design planning and data analysis methods 13th February
3. Data collection and preparation with selected participants and code interviews 24th March
4. Data analysis of interview transcripts 22nd April
5. Writing 17th June
6. Revision final work 28th July

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

  • Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
  • Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
  • Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

  • Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
  • Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
  • Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.


  • Sampling methods
  • Simple random sampling
  • Stratified sampling
  • Cluster sampling
  • Likert scales
  • Reproducibility


  • Null hypothesis
  • Statistical power
  • Probability distribution
  • Effect size
  • Poisson distribution

Research bias

  • Optimism bias
  • Cognitive bias
  • Implicit bias
  • Hawthorne effect
  • Anchoring bias
  • Explicit bias

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved June 25, 2024, from

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is your plagiarism score.

Elsevier QRcode Wechat

  • Research Process

Writing a Scientific Research Project Proposal

  • 5 minute read

Table of Contents

The importance of a well-written research proposal cannot be underestimated. Your research really is only as good as your proposal. A poorly written, or poorly conceived research proposal will doom even an otherwise worthy project. On the other hand, a well-written, high-quality proposal will increase your chances for success.

In this article, we’ll outline the basics of writing an effective scientific research proposal, including the differences between research proposals, grants and cover letters. We’ll also touch on common mistakes made when submitting research proposals, as well as a simple example or template that you can follow.

What is a scientific research proposal?

The main purpose of a scientific research proposal is to convince your audience that your project is worthwhile, and that you have the expertise and wherewithal to complete it. The elements of an effective research proposal mirror those of the research process itself, which we’ll outline below. Essentially, the research proposal should include enough information for the reader to determine if your proposed study is worth pursuing.

It is not an uncommon misunderstanding to think that a research proposal and a cover letter are the same things. However, they are different. The main difference between a research proposal vs cover letter content is distinct. Whereas the research proposal summarizes the proposal for future research, the cover letter connects you to the research, and how you are the right person to complete the proposed research.

There is also sometimes confusion around a research proposal vs grant application. Whereas a research proposal is a statement of intent, related to answering a research question, a grant application is a specific request for funding to complete the research proposed. Of course, there are elements of overlap between the two documents; it’s the purpose of the document that defines one or the other.

Scientific Research Proposal Format

Although there is no one way to write a scientific research proposal, there are specific guidelines. A lot depends on which journal you’re submitting your research proposal to, so you may need to follow their scientific research proposal template.

In general, however, there are fairly universal sections to every scientific research proposal. These include:

  • Title: Make sure the title of your proposal is descriptive and concise. Make it catch and informative at the same time, avoiding dry phrases like, “An investigation…” Your title should pique the interest of the reader.
  • Abstract: This is a brief (300-500 words) summary that includes the research question, your rationale for the study, and any applicable hypothesis. You should also include a brief description of your methodology, including procedures, samples, instruments, etc.
  • Introduction: The opening paragraph of your research proposal is, perhaps, the most important. Here you want to introduce the research problem in a creative way, and demonstrate your understanding of the need for the research. You want the reader to think that your proposed research is current, important and relevant.
  • Background: Include a brief history of the topic and link it to a contemporary context to show its relevance for today. Identify key researchers and institutions also looking at the problem
  • Literature Review: This is the section that may take the longest amount of time to assemble. Here you want to synthesize prior research, and place your proposed research into the larger picture of what’s been studied in the past. You want to show your reader that your work is original, and adds to the current knowledge.
  • Research Design and Methodology: This section should be very clearly and logically written and organized. You are letting your reader know that you know what you are going to do, and how. The reader should feel confident that you have the skills and knowledge needed to get the project done.
  • Preliminary Implications: Here you’ll be outlining how you anticipate your research will extend current knowledge in your field. You might also want to discuss how your findings will impact future research needs.
  • Conclusion: This section reinforces the significance and importance of your proposed research, and summarizes the entire proposal.
  • References/Citations: Of course, you need to include a full and accurate list of any and all sources you used to write your research proposal.

Common Mistakes in Writing a Scientific Research Project Proposal

Remember, the best research proposal can be rejected if it’s not well written or is ill-conceived. The most common mistakes made include:

  • Not providing the proper context for your research question or the problem
  • Failing to reference landmark/key studies
  • Losing focus of the research question or problem
  • Not accurately presenting contributions by other researchers and institutions
  • Incompletely developing a persuasive argument for the research that is being proposed
  • Misplaced attention on minor points and/or not enough detail on major issues
  • Sloppy, low-quality writing without effective logic and flow
  • Incorrect or lapses in references and citations, and/or references not in proper format
  • The proposal is too long – or too short

Scientific Research Proposal Example

There are countless examples that you can find for successful research proposals. In addition, you can also find examples of unsuccessful research proposals. Search for successful research proposals in your field, and even for your target journal, to get a good idea on what specifically your audience may be looking for.

While there’s no one example that will show you everything you need to know, looking at a few will give you a good idea of what you need to include in your own research proposal. Talk, also, to colleagues in your field, especially if you are a student or a new researcher. We can often learn from the mistakes of others. The more prepared and knowledgeable you are prior to writing your research proposal, the more likely you are to succeed.

Language Editing Services

One of the top reasons scientific research proposals are rejected is due to poor logic and flow. Check out our Language Editing Services to ensure a great proposal , that’s clear and concise, and properly referenced. Check our video for more information, and get started today.

Research Fraud: Falsification and Fabrication in Research Data

  • Manuscript Review

Research Fraud: Falsification and Fabrication in Research Data

Research Team Structure

Research Team Structure

You may also like.

what is a descriptive research design

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

Doctor doing a Biomedical Research Paper

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Biomedical Research Paper

Writing in Environmental Engineering

Making Technical Writing in Environmental Engineering Accessible

Risks of AI-assisted Academic Writing

To Err is Not Human: The Dangers of AI-assisted Academic Writing


When Data Speak, Listen: Importance of Data Collection and Analysis Methods

choosing the Right Research Methodology

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

Why is data validation important in research

Why is data validation important in research?

Writing a good review article

Writing a good review article

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

  • Privacy Policy

Research Method

Home » How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

How To Write A Research Proposal – Step-by-Step [Template]

Table of Contents

How To Write a Research Proposal

How To Write a Research Proposal

Writing a Research proposal involves several steps to ensure a well-structured and comprehensive document. Here is an explanation of each step:

1. Title and Abstract

  • Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research.
  • Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal.

2. Introduction:

  • Provide an introduction to your research topic, highlighting its significance and relevance.
  • Clearly state the research problem or question you aim to address.
  • Discuss the background and context of the study, including previous research in the field.

3. Research Objectives

  • Outline the specific objectives or aims of your research. These objectives should be clear, achievable, and aligned with the research problem.

4. Literature Review:

  • Conduct a comprehensive review of relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
  • Summarize key findings, identify gaps, and highlight how your research will contribute to the existing knowledge.

5. Methodology:

  • Describe the research design and methodology you plan to employ to address your research objectives.
  • Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques you will use.
  • Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate and suitable for your research.

6. Timeline:

  • Create a timeline or schedule that outlines the major milestones and activities of your research project.
  • Break down the research process into smaller tasks and estimate the time required for each task.

7. Resources:

  • Identify the resources needed for your research, such as access to specific databases, equipment, or funding.
  • Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources to carry out your research effectively.

8. Ethical Considerations:

  • Discuss any ethical issues that may arise during your research and explain how you plan to address them.
  • If your research involves human subjects, explain how you will ensure their informed consent and privacy.

9. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

  • Clearly state the expected outcomes or results of your research.
  • Highlight the potential impact and significance of your research in advancing knowledge or addressing practical issues.

10. References:

  • Provide a list of all the references cited in your proposal, following a consistent citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

11. Appendices:

  • Include any additional supporting materials, such as survey questionnaires, interview guides, or data analysis plans.

Research Proposal Format

The format of a research proposal may vary depending on the specific requirements of the institution or funding agency. However, the following is a commonly used format for a research proposal:

1. Title Page:

  • Include the title of your research proposal, your name, your affiliation or institution, and the date.

2. Abstract:

  • Provide a brief summary of your research proposal, highlighting the research problem, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.

3. Introduction:

  • Introduce the research topic and provide background information.
  • State the research problem or question you aim to address.
  • Explain the significance and relevance of the research.
  • Review relevant literature and studies related to your research topic.
  • Summarize key findings and identify gaps in the existing knowledge.
  • Explain how your research will contribute to filling those gaps.

5. Research Objectives:

  • Clearly state the specific objectives or aims of your research.
  • Ensure that the objectives are clear, focused, and aligned with the research problem.

6. Methodology:

  • Describe the research design and methodology you plan to use.
  • Explain the data collection methods, instruments, and analysis techniques.
  • Justify why the chosen methods are appropriate for your research.

7. Timeline:

8. Resources:

  • Explain how you will acquire or utilize these resources effectively.

9. Ethical Considerations:

  • If applicable, explain how you will ensure informed consent and protect the privacy of research participants.

10. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

11. References:

12. Appendices:

Research Proposal Template

Here’s a template for a research proposal:

1. Introduction:

2. Literature Review:

3. Research Objectives:

4. Methodology:

5. Timeline:

6. Resources:

7. Ethical Considerations:

8. Expected Outcomes and Significance:

9. References:

10. Appendices:

Research Proposal Sample

Title: The Impact of Online Education on Student Learning Outcomes: A Comparative Study

1. Introduction

Online education has gained significant prominence in recent years, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes by comparing them with traditional face-to-face instruction. The study will explore various aspects of online education, such as instructional methods, student engagement, and academic performance, to provide insights into the effectiveness of online learning.

2. Objectives

The main objectives of this research are as follows:

  • To compare student learning outcomes between online and traditional face-to-face education.
  • To examine the factors influencing student engagement in online learning environments.
  • To assess the effectiveness of different instructional methods employed in online education.
  • To identify challenges and opportunities associated with online education and suggest recommendations for improvement.

3. Methodology

3.1 Study Design

This research will utilize a mixed-methods approach to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. The study will include the following components:

3.2 Participants

The research will involve undergraduate students from two universities, one offering online education and the other providing face-to-face instruction. A total of 500 students (250 from each university) will be selected randomly to participate in the study.

3.3 Data Collection

The research will employ the following data collection methods:

  • Quantitative: Pre- and post-assessments will be conducted to measure students’ learning outcomes. Data on student demographics and academic performance will also be collected from university records.
  • Qualitative: Focus group discussions and individual interviews will be conducted with students to gather their perceptions and experiences regarding online education.

3.4 Data Analysis

Quantitative data will be analyzed using statistical software, employing descriptive statistics, t-tests, and regression analysis. Qualitative data will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and themes.

4. Ethical Considerations

The study will adhere to ethical guidelines, ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Informed consent will be obtained, and participants will have the right to withdraw from the study at any time.

5. Significance and Expected Outcomes

This research will contribute to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence on the impact of online education on student learning outcomes. The findings will help educational institutions and policymakers make informed decisions about incorporating online learning methods and improving the quality of online education. Moreover, the study will identify potential challenges and opportunities related to online education and offer recommendations for enhancing student engagement and overall learning outcomes.

6. Timeline

The proposed research will be conducted over a period of 12 months, including data collection, analysis, and report writing.

The estimated budget for this research includes expenses related to data collection, software licenses, participant compensation, and research assistance. A detailed budget breakdown will be provided in the final research plan.

8. Conclusion

This research proposal aims to investigate the impact of online education on student learning outcomes through a comparative study with traditional face-to-face instruction. By exploring various dimensions of online education, this research will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and challenges associated with online learning. The findings will contribute to the ongoing discourse on educational practices and help shape future strategies for maximizing student learning outcomes in online education settings.

About the author

' src=

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How To Write A Proposal

How To Write A Proposal – Step By Step Guide...

How To Write A Grant Proposal

How To Write A Grant Proposal – Step-by-Step...

How to choose an Appropriate Method for Research?

How to choose an Appropriate Method for Research?

How To Write A Business Proposal

How To Write A Business Proposal – Step-by-Step...

Grant Proposal

Grant Proposal – Example, Template and Guide

Business Proposal

Business Proposal – Templates, Examples and Guide

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • J Med Libr Assoc
  • v.100(4); 2012 Oct

Medical Writing: A Guide for Clinicians, Educators, and Researchers. Second Edition

Robert B. Taylor New York, NY: Springer. 2011.   372 p.  $34.95.  ISBN: 978-1-4419-8233-9.  

Many intelligent people with much knowledge to share with their professions think academic writing is like the drudgery of dishwashing, when instead it is more like the joy of dance practice where one thinks and works hard at choreographing (organizing) the details of expression. Writing is about careful thinking rather than quick wit, and Robert Taylor, in this book, is an excellent coach.

In Medical Writing, Taylor first offers encouragement and motivation, followed by chapters about important reminders of basic skills, advice related to writer's block, specifics on writing for academic journals, and common pitfalls to understand and avoid. The remaining chapters address writing for specific purposes. He includes guidance on writing book chapters, grants, research protocols, literature reviews, and reports of clinical studies, as well case reports, editorials, and even letters to the editor. The two new chapters in this edition are “How to Write a Research Protocol” and “How to Write a Grant Proposal.” The final chapter is about the actual submission process. The book is indexed and has five appendixes, including a glossary of terminology used by editors and publishers, a page of proofreaders' marks, medical abbreviations, lab reference values for adults, and a glossary of methodological and statistical terms.

With its appealing, accessible design and rich content, this book will be useful to beginning writers among researchers, physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals—or anyone else with valuable information to impart to colleagues. The reader's purpose need not be medical to benefit from this compact guide to professional writing. In addition to providing help and encouragement for getting started, this book will also serve as a reference manual one returns to frequently like style manuals, thesauri, or usage guidebooks. The author offers humor, literary references, and relevant inspiring epigraphs that make his advice enjoyably digestible.

Throughout Medical Writing , Taylor models what he teaches. He tells the reader how to do something and then he demonstrates it—using his own writing in the book. He begins a paragraph warning against excessive alliteration with: “Alliteration almost always annoys an audience” (p. 58). He also provides excellent examples from other writers. Each chapter begins with a short epigraph from a poet or physician (or the occasional more whimsical source) to inspire the reader onward. Chapter two begins with good advice, “Do not skip this chapter.” In the chapter, he covers the importance of structure and organization, how to develop a paragraph with variety and cadence, differences between active and passive voice, and the correct use of punctuation. He includes an informative section on the “types of words we use” (rather than the sleep-inducing “parts of speech”). He uses metaphors—“Verbosity is a disease” (p. 50)—and similes—“like attempting to build a house without a blueprint” (p. 31)—throughout the book, which enliven the readability of a topic often avoided by those who most need it. Detailed, practical advice is sprinkled throughout with surprises from history and medicine: “bezoar” is the Persian word for antidote (p. 53), and Roget was a physician who first published his thesaurus in 1852 (p. 81).

The content is somewhat similar in advice and style to Lester King's Why Not Say It Clearly: A Guide to Scientific Writing (ISBN: 978-0-316-49346-8), but with updated examples and quoted material. Taylor's writing style is that of a friendly mentor and teacher who offers easily absorbable instruction for the nonwriter. Those who need only the motivation might turn instead to Paul Silvia's How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing (ISBN: 978-1-59147-743-3).

There are flaws in this book. Taylor's self-reflecting is somewhat overdone. He does not trust his reader to notice his modeling and points it out far too often (once would have been enough). He announces that he “invented” the two-word phrase “thesaurus abuse”—a silly claim in an era of Google. The frequency of typos is more and more common now that spell-check apparently substitutes for copyeditors; this is, however, particularly unfortunate in the second edition of a book about writing. The author states that Google Scholar “seems to let me focus my query better than PubMed” (p. 20), which will be worrisome to librarians who work with scientists but is certainly a reasonable suggestion for medical professionals who write for trade magazines rather than peer-reviewed research journals—at least, he uses Google Scholar, rather than Google.

In the final measure, this book is recommended for both academic and public libraries. Practicing physicians and allied health professionals unaffiliated with academic medical centers might also benefit. Taylor is an engaging teacher who will enable the courage of beginners and offer support throughout the process of scholarly communication.

The Med Writers Logo

Professional Medical Writing & Editing Services

medical research proposal writing

Writing a medical research grant proposal? 5 tips for success

The United States government offers over 900 federal grant programs totaling more than $721B. In 2019, over half of that funding was awarded to healthcare research. Accessing a slice of the grant money pie should be simple, right?

Unfortunately, it is not. In 2020, the National Institute of Health (NIH) received just over 55,000 medical research grant proposals . Only 11,332 were awarded grants—an approval rate of 21%. These statistics aren’t unique to the United States either. Biomedical research funder Wellcome in the UK funded around 20% of applications in 2017-2018 .

With the number of applications rising each year, yours will have to stand out from the crowd. Even the most subtle mistake in your proposal could mean rejection when it’s stacked up against the competition. When it comes to writing a medical research grant proposal, here are our 5 tips for success.

1. Know Your Audience

First of all, make sure your research goals match up with the award you’re seeking. Federal agencies may have different focus areas and objectives than private foundations. Aligning yourself with the right opportunity can increase your chances for success.

In other words, do your research. The NIH, for example, publishes weekly Funding Opportunities and Notices .

Once you’ve found an opportunity, don’t start writing yet. Fully review and understand the application requirements and process. Do not skip this step! Why? The average NIH grant application has instructions totaling over 100 pages .

Look for the contact person listed in the instructions. There is usually a name, phone number, and email address. Call, or email if there’s no phone number listed. Talk to the contact person about your idea and see if it is something the agency would be interested in funding under this grant. Most people skip this crucial step. Don’t be afraid. Just pick up the phone and call.

Next, prepare a roadmap for your application based on the evaluation criteria. For example, the NIH evaluates applications based on five core criteria , as broken down by Dr. Hossein Ardehali of the Feinberg Cardiovascular and Renal Research Institute:

Significance: Does this project address an important problem in the field? How will this project impact the field and how will it improve scientific knowledge?

Investigators: Are the investigators qualified and experienced to conduct this project? If the project is collaborative, do the investigators have complementary expertise that is appropriate for the project? 

Innovation: Is the project concept novel and original? Are the experimental techniques innovative?

Approach: Are the strategy and study design appropriate for the completion of the study? Are potential limitations and alternative strategies discussed?

Environment: Is the institution supportive and are the resources adequate for the project?

2. Take Your Time  

Dr. Ardehali recommends a timeline of 4-6 months to prepare your grant proposal. Take special note of the due date and aim to have it completed at least a week or two in advance to account for unforeseen delays.

Take Your Time

This long lead time allows you to review not only the funding agency and its application requirements but also what makes a winning proposal. Open Grants shares proposals from a variety of researchers to help early-career scientists write better grants. They indicate whether or not the project was funded.

Research administrator Beth Keithly , of The University of Texas at Dallas, explains the difference between giving yourself months instead of weeks to write your medical research grant proposal.

She recommends at least 120 hours to write a grant (probably more for NSF or NIH grants.) If you write over the course of six weeks, that’s 20 hours a week. But if you spread it out over six months, you’ll be writing five hours a week. And this doesn’t include time for the preliminary research outlined above.

Slow and steady wins the medical research grant proposal writing race!

3. Write Well

Let’s start with the basics. Ensure there are absolutely no spelling or grammatical mistakes. In a medical research grant proposal, simple slip-ups can call your competence into question. Attention to detail in your writing is indicative of overall diligence.

Remember that a medical research grant proposal is not a research paper to be published in a journal. Clear wording trumps medical or scientific jargon. Think of the proposal like a job interview—make a solid first impression. This is your chance to explain what you can accomplish in your field of study and why that is important. Showcase your technical expertise in the research design itself.

How to test the strength of your writing? Ardehali explains: “The proposal needs to be clear and flow well…In other words, the grant should tell a story that is easy to follow, even to someone not familiar with the topic.”

 Proposal writing is no walk in the park. It can be especially difficult if you haven’t written one before. If you’re struggling with it, consider taking an online class to improve your skills. Coursera, LinkedIn Learning, Udemy, and Skillshare offer a variety of grant writing courses.

4. Edit Even Better 

Because you’ve followed Tip #2, you have ample time to refine your proposal. It helps to space out the writing and editing phases by a few days so you can approach your work with fresh eyes.

One of the best ways to increase your chances of getting your next project funded is to have other Ph.D. scientists critique your grant and provide feedback. Another option is to have a professional scientific writer edit your grant application to improve how it reads and eliminate errors. Here at The Med Writers, we offer both of those services.

Edit Even Better

Use a checklist to ensure you’ve fulfilled all of the application requirements. And submit your medical research grant proposal well in advance of the deadline—a computer malfunction or WiFi issue could spell disaster at the eleventh hour.

5. Don’t Give Up 

Unfortunately, rejections are part of medical research grant proposal writing. Some rejections come complete with feedback, but you can request an explanation if you don’t receive one. Use it to strengthen your proposal for another submission and to improve your future writing.

Writer James Mitchell Crow outlines some “ Rejection Resources ” to help unfunded projects find future success.

  • Find support from peers. Fellow researchers have experienced rejection, too. Seek out blogs or spaces where others share their stories and tips on what to do next after a medical research grant proposal is rejected.
  • Search for another grant scheme. It could be that your project and the funding agency’s strategic goals were a mismatch. That might not be the case elsewhere.
  • Choose a different type of funder. If a government agency rejected your medical research grant proposal, look to an industry or foundation instead.

Successful grant writing is hard but not impossible

Your medical research grant proposal will be on the right track once you follow our 5 tips for success. Know your audience (the funder), take your time, write well, and edit even better. Even if it’s rejected, don’t give up! We have professionals with years of experience providing NIH grant application writing services to get it approved faster.

Contact us for help with your grant application—we employ professional writers with medical and scientific backgrounds. We can elevate your writing above the rest!

medical research proposal writing

  • Subscribe to journal Subscribe
  • Get new issue alerts Get alerts

Secondary Logo

Journal logo.

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

23 Questions to Guide the Writing of a Quantitative Medical Education Research Proposal

Fischer, Krisztina MD, PhD, MMSc 1 ; Kesselheim, Jennifer C. MD, MEd 2

1 assistant professor of radiology

2 director, Master of Medical Sciences in Medical Education, and associate professor of pediatrics, Harvard Medical School


  • + Favorites
  • View in Gallery

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Accreditation of medical education programs: moving from student outcomes to..., design-based research: a methodology for studying innovation in teaching and..., if students are not customers, what are they, standard setting in medical education, effects of tutor expertise on student performance in relation to prior....

LOGO: UC San Diego School of Medicine

ISP Proposal Samples 

Analysis of a
Scientific or
Medical Problem
Community Service & Leadership Medical Education Scientific Research Focused Clinical Multidisciplinary

You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader to view or print these PDF files. Click the button below to download a free copy:

Section 'Sub' Navigation:

  • Introduction
  • Role of Committee
  • Expectations
  • Past ISP Titles and Chairs
  • Sample Proposals
  • Helpful Hints
  • Proposal Review Process
  • Time Frames
  • Completing the ISP
  • Elective Credit
  • Contact ISP Coordinator
  • AudioVisual Support
  • Body Donation Program
  • Central Administration
  • Educational Technology
  • Professional Development Center
  • Simulation Training Center
  • MedEd Site Index

Page 'Breadcrumb' Navigation:

Site 'Main' Navigation:

  • ASA Divisional Offices/Centers
  • Admissions Office
  • Financial Aid Office
  • Student Affairs Office
  • Diversity & Community Partnerships
  • Global Health & Academic Concentration
  • Medical Scientist Training Program
  • Problem Based Learning Recruitment
  • Schedules and Calendars
  • Visiting Senior Students
  • SOM Block Schedule
  • UGME Divisional Offices/Centers
  • ACA Preceptor
  • Educational Support Services
  • ISP Handbook
  • Medical Education Technology and Evaluation
  • Medical Teaching Laboratory
  • Credentials Verification
  • House Officer
  • Benefits & Liability Insurance
  • Medical License, DEA Registration & EPCS Enrollment
  • Visiting Residents
  • Program Coordinators & Directors
  • Policies & Notices
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • GME Orientation
  • Continuing Medical Education
  • Alumni Affairs
  • Business Office
  • Equipment Replacement
  • MedEd Support Services
  • Medical Education Technology
  • Medical Education
  • School of Medicine
  • UC San Diego Health System
  • UC San Diego Health Sciences

LOGO: University of California, San Diego

Official Web Site of the University of California, San Diego. Copyright © 2024 Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Webmaster

All Formats

Table of Contents

Proposal template bundle, 5 steps to make a medical research proposal, step 1: collect source material, step 2: devise a plan, step 3: identify problems, step 4: set goals, step 5: evaluate and assess, 17+ medical research proposal templates, 1. simple medical research proposal template, 2. undergraduate medical student research proposal, 3. medical research proposal template, 4. sample medical research proposal, 5. medical clinical research proposal example, 6. medical study research proposal in pdf, 7. basic medical research proposal in pdf, 8. medical ph.d. project research proposal, 9. bio-medical pharmacology research proposal template, 10. medical public health issues research proposal in pdf, 11. medical research request for proposal, 12. medical research proposal format, 13. medical student research proposal in pdf, 14. medical research proposal submission form, 15. medical research proposal format in doc, 16. medical research proposal in doc, 17. simple medical thesis research proposal template, 18. medical research proposal letter template, proposal templates, 17+ medical research proposal templates in pdf | doc.

To create a medical research proposal, you need to find valuable information and create a complicated document. The proposal is mainly devised for investors, academic heads, or other people who would value the legitimacy of your project proposal and assess the merit. For successful research proposals, you need to follow certain guidelines for efficiency. We have all sorts of medical research proposal templates for users with specific needs. Whether it’s for a clinical Ph.D. research on public health issues or an undergraduate letter over pharmacology, we got them all right here. Or if you are wondering, you can use proposal templates that bring ready-made documents for your benefit!

medical research proposal writing

  • Google Docs

medical proposal template

  • Apple Pages

medical student research proposal template

More in Proposal Templates

Medical Joining Letter

Thank you letter for your service from customer template, sample florist business thank you letter template, medical excuse letter for work, medical assistant thank you letter after interview, medical leave request letter, medical bill dispute letter, thank you letter for medical support, medical assistant thank you letter, medical thank you letter.

  • Proposal Templates – 170+ Free Word, PDF, Format Download!
  • 57+ Training Proposal Templates in PDF | Google Docs | MS Word | Pages
  • 7+ Logistics Proposal Templates in PDF
  • 13+ Recruitment Proposal Templates in Google Docs | MS Word | Pages | PDF | MS Excel
  • 12+ Logistics Business Proposal Templates in PDF
  • 67+ Project Proposal in PDF , Docs
  • 39+ Sponsorship Proposal Templates – Free Word, Excel, PDF Format Download!
  • 23+ Funding Proposal Templates – DOC, PDF, Excel, Apple Pages, Google Docs
  • 22+ Bid Proposal Templates – Word, PDF, Google Docs, Apple Pages
  • 16+ School Project Proposal Templates – Word, PDF
  • 11+ Product Business Proposal Templates – Sample, Example
  • 10+ Travel Insurance Document Templates in Google Docs | Google Sheets | Excel | Word | Numbers | Pages | PDF
  • 10+ Auto Insurance Templates in Google Docs | Word | Pages | PDF
  • 10+ Homeowners Insurance Templates in Google Docs | Word | Pages | PDF
  • 25+ Small Business Proposal Templates – Word, PDF

File Formats

Word templates, google docs templates, excel templates, powerpoint templates, google sheets templates, google slides templates, pdf templates, publisher templates, psd templates, indesign templates, illustrator templates, pages templates, keynote templates, numbers templates, outlook templates.


  1. Medical Proposal

    medical research proposal writing

  2. 6+ SAMPLE Medical Research Proposal in PDF

    medical research proposal writing

  3. Phd Research Proposal Template

    medical research proposal writing

  4. Nursing Research Proposal Paper Example

    medical research proposal writing

  5. 17+ Medical Research Proposal Templates in PDF

    medical research proposal writing

  6. 9 Free Research Proposal Templates (with Examples)

    medical research proposal writing


  1. Creating a research proposal

  2. What is a Research Proposal

  3. Session 16: Grants and Proposal Writing By Dr. Kauser Abdullah Malik (FCCU)

  4. research proposal

  5. How to write a research proposal

  6. Conducting proposal online session 20/7/2023


  1. (PDF) How to write a research proposal? A guide for medical

    Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical ...

  2. Writing Successful Research Proposals for Medical Science

    It is our hope that by demystifying the grant writing and review process that more anesthesiologists will be encouraged to submit proposals for research funding. As part of this effort, we strongly encourage residents and fellows interested in research careers to obtain adequate research training and to apply for appropriate fellowship/junior ...

  3. How to write a research proposal?

    Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or 'blueprint' for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project ...

  4. How to Write a Research Proposal

    Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We've included a few for you below. Example research proposal #1: "A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management" Example research proposal #2: "Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use" Title page

  5. How to prepare a Research Proposal

    It puts the proposal in context. 3. The introduction typically begins with a statement of the research problem in precise and clear terms. 1. The importance of the statement of the research problem 5: The statement of the problem is the essential basis for the construction of a research proposal (research objectives, hypotheses, methodology ...

  6. Writing a Scientific Research Project Proposal

    Abstract: This is a brief (300-500 words) summary that includes the research question, your rationale for the study, and any applicable hypothesis. You should also include a brief description of your methodology, including procedures, samples, instruments, etc. Introduction: The opening paragraph of your research proposal is, perhaps, the most ...

  7. How To Write A Research Proposal

    Here is an explanation of each step: 1. Title and Abstract. Choose a concise and descriptive title that reflects the essence of your research. Write an abstract summarizing your research question, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes. It should provide a brief overview of your proposal. 2.

  8. Medical Writing: A Guide for Clinicians, Educators, and Researchers

    The two new chapters in this edition are "How to Write a Research Protocol" and "How to Write a Grant Proposal." The final chapter is about the actual submission process. ... Throughout Medical Writing, Taylor models what he teaches. He tells the reader how to do something and then he demonstrates it—using his own writing in the book.

  9. PDF Writing a Research Proposal Medical Research Council

    research grant proposal. − Receiving relevant and up-to-date information about new research methods. − Establishing collaborative associations with peers. − Constructive feedback on research proposals and throughout the research process. − Assistance in the development of a long-term research and writing plan.

  10. How to write a research proposal?

    Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or 'blueprint' for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should ...

  11. Writing & Submitting Proposals

    FINISH. The Department of Pediatrics is deeply committed to training the next generation of physician scientists and scientific leaders in biomedical research. An important aspect of this training is writing research proposals because developing a research proposal enables skill-building opportunities in thinking critically and communicating ideas.

  12. PDF Medical Student Research Office

    dical Student Research Office. to Prepare a Research ProposalResearch proposals are frequently written in order to obtain either. a job or funding for a project. As a student, you might need to write a research proposal if you want to apply. or a Scholarly Year or a grant. That means you are in a situation in which you have to convince the ...

  13. 7 tips for writing a winning med ed research proposal

    If you plan to apply for a medical education research grant, writing a strong proposal can help you rise above the competition. These expert recommendations will be useful as you pursue future funding opportunities.. Writing a compelling grant proposal requires strategic thinking and research, especially if you want to increase your chances of attracting a particular funder, according to a ...

  14. A Blueprint for Writing Effectively for the Health Care Field

    A Blueprint for Writing Effectively for the Health Care Field. April 2, 2021. As a professional working in the health care field, you have valuable information to share with your colleagues and patients—from reporting the latest scientific research and outcomes data, to developing compelling grant proposals, to promoting public health messages.

  15. Writing a medical research grant proposal? 5 tips for success

    Use a checklist to ensure you've fulfilled all of the application requirements. And submit your medical research grant proposal well in advance of the deadline—a computer malfunction or WiFi issue could spell disaster at the eleventh hour. 5. Don't Give Up . Unfortunately, rejections are part of medical research grant proposal writing.

  16. PDF Sample Research Proposal

    1 Sample Research Proposal Resident: John Smith, PGY2 Research Mentor: Jane Doe, MD, Section of General Internal Medicine Date of Proposal: February 5, 2009 I. Title of Proposed Research Project Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use II. Specific Aims In conducting this study, we will accomplish the following specific aims:

  17. How to prepare a research proposal in the health sciences?

    Science*. Writing / standards*. Knowing how to properly prepare a research proposal is a real challenge - and being able to prepare an excellent research proposal is increasingly a requirement to compete for funding with assurances of success. With this in mind, we aim to share with the reader our experience (in many cases, unsucc ….

  18. 23 Questions to Guide the Writing of a Quantitative Medical ...

    2 director, Master of Medical Sciences in Medical Education, and associate professor of pediatrics, Harvard Medical School Academic Medicine: January 2022 - Volume 97 - Issue 1 - p 164 doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003660

  19. Medical Research Proposal Sample & Guide

    A medical research proposal is a document that outlines the purpose and methodology of a proposed research project. It includes information about what the researcher intends to study, how they plan to conduct their research and measurement for success or failure. The proposal also explains why the research is essential, what ethical ...

  20. Sample Proposals

    ISP Proposal Samples. Analysis of a. Scientific or. Medical Problem. Community Service & Leadership. Medical Education. Scientific Research. Focused Clinical Multidisciplinary. SMP1 - [71 kb]

  21. How to Write a Research Proposal

    A research proposal is a short piece of academic writing that outlines the research a graduate student intends to carry out. It starts by explaining why the research will be helpful or necessary, then describes the steps of the potential research and how the research project would add further knowledge to the field of study.

  22. 17+ Medical Research Proposal Templates in PDF

    As our Medical Research Proposal in Google Docs Submission Form has been designed in Word format to give you the unique experience of writing your proposals with factual information and numeric data to make your project more appealing. To get the best results, download this immediately! 15. Medical Research Proposal Format in DOC

  23. Medical Proposal

    Writing a medical research proposal isn't difficult. But there are rules to follow. At the very least, you need to spend time brainstorming ideas. Remember, the goal of your proposal is to win your target over. And if you nail it in the brainstorming stage, you can attract attention to the actual proposal. A good proposal is clear and direct ...

  24. Article Proposal

    Mention any research or sources you will use to back up your points. Highlight any original research, interviews, or unique perspectives you will bring to the article. 9. Provide a Writing Sample. If possible, include a sample paragraph or section from the article. This gives the editor a taste of your writing style and the quality of your work ...