Your job, as a review article author, is to pull together and summarize the recent primary literature so that somebody can go to your paper and get a good sense of the field. It may also address particular controversies, and in the process of doing a review article, you're also putting together a comprehensive list of citations on a topic or research question, and that can be a great resource for others in the field. And then, I clearly stated the goal of my review, which was to critically evaluate the literature in the areas of measurement, prevalence, risk factors, outcomes, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment.

So, compelling projects also often combine two unseemingly unrelated threads of work to challenge or shift the current field of clinical practice paradigm. Of course, since you're applying to a grant, a fellowship, or a career development award, make sure that your research that is being proposed is relevant and appropriate for the mission of the funding opportunity announcement. Team science is a collaborative effort to address a scientific challenge that leverages the strengths and expertise of personnel trained in different fields.

And for example, to test a stated hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, challenge an existing paradigm or clinical practice, address a critical barrier to progress in the field, or develop new technology. So hopefully, you understand that just like a machine or these gears, if one of the answers to these questions isn't perfectly aligned, then you won't be able to have a really compelling specific aims page. Compelling projects and proposals often tackle particular gaps in the knowledge base or need that when addressed significantly advance the field.

Answering these questions will effectively address this background and significance, the aims, the timeline and the conclusion and future directions section that can form an outline for your research plan. In our bridge analogy on data collected during construction, we might say that our results confirmed that the material meets current standards and justifies continued work. In this section, you should summarize the expected outcomes and how they will bridge a current knowledge gap, and how the proposed project will lead to progress in the field.

One of my biggest pet peeves that I feel is important for me to address in this module is the whole idea of asking the candidate to write a draft of their own letter of recommendation. I remembered the writer turning the edit around quickly and I bothered to go back to my emails and look up the exact timing so I could put it in the letter. That sounds great at first pass, but as soon as you stop to think about it carefully, you wonder why the recommender used most enthusiastic as opposed to something like most talented or most accomplished or most brilliant.

If you have a poor undergraduate transcript or low test scores, but the rest of your application is strong, tackle that weakness head on in your personal essay. Despite thinking of myself as a hard-core mathematician during my high school years, the amount of love, compassion and care I experienced during my voluntary work at an institute for adults with learning disability was more than enough to sway me towards medicine. For example, I ended my essay for the science writing internship on the boat in Antarctica with the opportunity to work with your team would put me smack in the middle of one of the most exciting research labs on the planet.

So the first sentence says the discovery of small interfering RNAs by Fire and Mello has provided new avenues of combating resistant cancers. They are an emerging class of self-assembled porous materials whose properties can be readily tuned by varying the molecular building blocks. The simultaneous and efficient delivery of cisplatin and pooled siRNAs to ovarian cancer can allow for enhanced anticancer efficacy by blocking drug resistance pathways.