MBIAP-RG Preface
The vision of MBIAP-RG is to change the face of Physiotherapy Profession/Practice through innovative research.
The mission of MBIAP-RG is to identify and support financially the high quality physiotherapy research endeavours which intend to optimise physical function add value to the profession and the society at large.
MBIAP-RG Overview
2.1 Objectives
Primary objective of the MBIAP-RG is to fund the highest quality, scientifically based and clinically relevant research in the field of physiotherapy. The proposed study must focus on the most critical regarding clinical practice with appropriate study design.
2.2 Funding priorities
Studies with direct benefit to the physiotherapy practice
Novel question which is important to the practice of physiotherapy
Studies to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic intervention or to explore the scientific basis of interventions used in physiotherapy
Studies to address the need for various assessment tools with clinical relevance
2.3 Grant amount
The grant amount of MBIAP-RG for one year will be INR 50000 and the number of studies to be funded every year would be declared at the time of call for applications.
2.4 Use of Funds
Funds needs to be used only for the expenses related to the conduct of the study. It may be salary, equipment’s, travel allowances, printing and supplies. Intended use of the fund needs to be intimated at the time of grant application.
2.5 Payment of funds
Funds will be awarded only to the studies conducted in Mumbai city and it will be directly payed to the research account but not to the individual investigator.
2.6 Limitation of use
No funds will be provided for cost overruns or to meet deficit of currently ongoing trials. In case of any equipment purchase it should not be more than 20% of the total grant.
Eligibility
Guidelines for distribution of funds and criteria for selecting recipients are established by the Executive Committee (EC) of MBIAP based on the recommendations of Independent Scientific Reviewers (ISR). The SRC reviews applications and makes recommendations to Executive Committee (EC) of MBIAP for final approval. Proof of IRB Approval is not required at the time of application. However, in case the project is selected for the grant, investigators must submit the Proof of IRB Approval to receive the approved grant. Potential for successful completion of the project is a major consideration in awarding the MBIAP-RG.
Applicants
Project proposals can be submitted by an individual or by group of investigators. In case of group of authors involved, the principal investigator must communicate with the EC.
Principal investigator(PI)
Principal investigator of the research study must possess the following qualifications:
Terms and Conditions of MBIAP-RG
Interim and final reports of the research study must be reported to EC of MBIAP every six months and within a month of study completion respectively. Having failed to do so would result in “failure to meet the Good Standing of the grant”, the PI will not be considered for any future grants.
MBIAP-RG credit acknowledgement
Publications, Presentations Press-release must include the credit line “This research has been supported in full/part by a Research Grant from the Mumbai Branch of Indian Association of Physiotherapists.”
Publications must have financial declaration, posters must have IAP logo and oral presentation must have a slide acknowledging MBIAP-RG.
Selection Process
Every research grant application will be blinded (All the authors and their institute affiliations) of by one of the EC member and will be sent it to the Independent Scientific Reviewers for rating. Ranking of all the studies will be done according to the average rating based on five-point scale. Rating will be based on the following criteria.
Criteria for evaluation of MBIAP-RG
Overall Impact: The project’s overall impact on the field will be considered, weighting the review criteria and addressing the strengths and weaknesses of the application in terms of the five review criteria. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact, and thus, deserve a high merit rating. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative, but is essential to move a field forward or improve clinical decision or outcome.
Significance: Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical technologies, treatments, services, or preventative instructions that drive this field be changed? Does the project address a Research Agenda question? If so, which questions? Does the proposed methodology enable the investigator to answer the Research Agenda question?
Approach: Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analysis well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Is the sample size appropriate? Are the recruitment and retention plans well thought out? Are the assessment and outcome measures to be used appropriate? If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed? Does the study carry greater than minimal risk? Does the study have the likelihood of IRB Approval?
Investigators: Is/are the Primary Investigator, collaborators, and other researchers well-suited to the project? Do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)?
Innovation: Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of practice or novel in the broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Environment: Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment, and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
