Scientific Proposal Writing by njl12492

VIEWS: 47 PAGES: 115

More Info
									Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Weekly Quiz
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. My counselor recommended a vacation.
B. My councilor recommended a vacation.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. My counselor recommended a vacation.
B. My councilor recommended a vacation.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. He owed over $1000 to the doctor.
B. He owed more than $1000 to the doctor.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. He owed over $1000 to the doctor.
B. He owed more than $1000 to the doctor.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The city counselor was re-elected.
B. The city councilor was re-elected.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The city counselor was re-elected.
B. The city councilor was re-elected.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The negotiators effected an agreement.
B. The negotiators affected an agreement.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The negotiators effected an agreement.
B. The negotiators affected an agreement.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. D-day was a historic day.
 B. D-day was a historical day.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. D-day was a historic day.
 B. D-day was a historical day.



 Actually both!
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. Your procrastination had an averse effect
   on your grade.
 B. Your procrastination had an adverse
   effect on your grade.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. Your procrastination had an averse effect
   on your grade.
 B. Your procrastination had an adverse
   effect on your grade.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. The bacteria were treated gently.
 B. The bacteria was treated gently.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. The bacteria were treated gently.
 B. The bacteria was treated gently.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. We will give you a loan irregardless of
   your income.
 B. We will give you a loan regardless of your
   income.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. We will give you a loan irregardless of
   your income.
 B. We will give you a loan regardless of
   your income.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



 A. Fewer men are in the class than women.
 B. Less men are in the class than women.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


 A. Fewer men are in the class than women.
 B. Less men are in the class than women.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. I’m averse to banana flavor.
B. I’m adverse to banana flavor.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. I’m averse to banana flavor.
B. I’m adverse to banana flavor.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. That man and I were talking.
B. That man and me were talking.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. That man and I were talking.
B. That man and me were talking.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. Their data was intriguing.
B. Their data were intriguing.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214



A. Their data was intriguing.
B. Their data were intriguing.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She told Bob and me that the end was near.
B. She told Bob and I that the end was near.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She told Bob and me that the end was near.
B. She told Bob and I that the end was near.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. I always thought it was further to the moon.
B. I always thought it was farther to the moon.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. I always thought it was further to the moon.
B. I always thought it was farther to the moon.
   Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That 17th-century pot is a historical piece.
B. That 17th-century pot is a historic piece.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That 17th-century pot is a historical piece.
B. That 17th-century pot is a historic piece.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Between you and I, we should have it done in
   no time.
B. Between you and me, we should have it done
   in no time.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Between you and I, we should have it done in
   no time.
B. Between you and me, we should have it
   done in no time.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. He died of unknown causes.
B. He died from unknown causes.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. He died of unknown causes.
B. He died from unknown causes.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Binge drinking causes adverse health effects.
B. Binge drinking causes averse health effects.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Binge drinking causes adverse health
   effects.
B. Binge drinking causes averse health effects.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. To whom did you betray my secret?
B. To who did you betray my secret?
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. To whom did you betray my secret?
B. To who did you betray my secret?
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The person about who you speak is a fool.
B. The person about whom you speak is a fool.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The person about who you speak is a fool.
B. The person about whom you speak is a
   fool.
   Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. It’s my reputation on the line.
B. Its my reputation on the line.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. It’s my reputation on the line.
B. Its my reputation on the line.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The 20-pound weight loss helped his self-
   confidence.
B. The 20 pound weight loss helped his self-
   confidence.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The 20-pound weight loss helped his self-
   confidence.
B. The 20 pound weight loss helped his self-
   confidence.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Its head was on the chopping block.
B. It’s head was on the chopping block.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. Its head was on the chopping block.
B. It’s head was on the chopping block.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She is the candidate who we hope to elect.
B. She is the candidate whom we hope to elect.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She is the candidate who we hope to elect.
B. She is the candidate whom we hope to
   elect.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The prevalence of autism is 10 out of 1,000
   people.
B. The incidence of autism is 10 out of 1,000
   people.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The prevalence of autism is 10 out of 1,000
   people.
B. The incidence of autism is 10 out of 1,000
   people.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She could have made it further in life.
B. She could have made it farther in life.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. She could have made it further in life.
B. She could have made it farther in life.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That strata includes most of the elderly
   patients.
B. Those strata include most of the elderly
   patients.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That strata includes most of the elderly
   patients.
B. Those strata include most of the elderly
   patients.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That strata includes most of the elderly
   patients.
B. That stratum includes most of the elderly
   patients.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. That strata includes most of the elderly
   patients.
B. That stratum includes most of the elderly
   patients.
   Scientific Writing, HRP 214

A. Asilomar was a peremptory strike aimed at shielding
    science from the public and its elected
    representatives.
B. Asilomar was a preemptive strike aimed at shielding
    science from the public and its elected
    representatives.
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
A. Asilomar was a peremptory strike aimed at shielding
    science from the public and its elected representatives.
B. Asilomar was a preemptive strike aimed at shielding science
    from the public and its elected representatives.

"Peremptory" -- Latin "perimere” -- "to take entirely"
     --comes from "per-" ("thoroughly") and "emere" ("to take")
     --implies removal of one's option to disagree or contest something
     --sometimes suggests an abrupt dictatorial manner combined with an
     unwillingness to tolerate disobedience or dissent
     --as in "he was given a peremptory dismissal"
“Preemptive" -- Latin "praeemere" --"prae-" ("before") plus "emere."
     --means "marked by the seizing of the initiative"
     --as in "a preemptive attack"
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The president launched a preemptive attack.
B. The president launched a peremptory attack.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214


A. The president launched a preemptive
   attack.
B. The president launched a peremptory attack.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214

Lecture Eight:
Wrap up of scientific manuscripts; Overview
 of Grant Proposals
 Scientific Writing, HRP 214
 Scientific Manuscripts
Submission process
1. Identify a journal for submission
2. Follow that journal’s style guidelines (online)
3. Submit your manuscript with a cover letter
   •   some require written signature from all authors
4. Possible outcomes: accepted, accepted pending revisions,
   rejected but re-submission possible, no resubmission possible
5. Revision and resubmission: re-submit with cover letter that
   addresses reviewers critiques point by point
6. Once accepted, author approves final proofs
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Resubmission Cover Letter
Date
Editor
Editor’s Address
Subject: Revised Manuscript, MS#:

    Dear Dr. Editor,
    Enclosed are xx copies of the revised paper (changes are highlighted on one of the
    copies), “Title.” We appreciate your helpful comments and those of the reviewers.

    Correspondence should be sent to:
    Corresponding Author’s: Address, Email, Phone, Fax

    We have made revisions based on the comments/suggestions of Reviewers I and II.
    The comments of each reviewer are numbered below, with our response
    (clarifications and changes) following.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Resubmission Cover Letter, Continued
Reviewer I:
1. There is little discussion of xxx
We agree with Reviewers I and II that the section on xxx was too abbreviated.
Therefore, we have added a paragraph that highlights xxx (paragraph 33).

2. Could you comment on xx
We have added a sentence to paragraph 9 in Methods/Materials that comments on xx
.
.
.

Thank you again for your helpful comments. Please let us know if any other revisions
are required.

Regards,
Corresponding Author
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Authorship

1. Who gets authorship?

   Any author listed on the paper’s title page should take public responsibility
    for its content.

2. In what order?
 Order implies authors’ relative contributions
 Keep in mind: visibility often goes three deep.
 In some labs, the head of the lab or research team is automatically included
    on any paper coming from the lab, as senior author, second author, or last-
    listed author
 For fairness, alphabetical or reverse alphabetical order may be used if
    researchers have contributed equally.
 Large working groups may be cited as a group
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Authorship

 Conflict of Interest. Most journals ask authors to disclose
 relevant conflicts of interest, including specific financial
 interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript, in their
 cover letter or on a specific form.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Acknowledgements

• Funding sources
• Contributors who did not get authorship (e.g. offered
  materials, advice or consultation that was not significant
  enough to merit authorship).
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
References

• Use a computerized bibliographic program.
• Follow journal guidelines (may request alphabetical listing
  or order of appearance in the text).
• Follow standard abbreviations (can be found online).
• Some journals limit number of references allowed.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Besides research papers,

Other types of articles include:
• The case report
• The review article or meta-analysis
• The opinion paper/editorial
 Scientific Writing, HRP 214

Grant Proposals (will primarily review NIH-
 type proposals here)
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214
  NIH grants overview
NIH funding criteria:

  1. Significance: ability of the project to improve
     health
  2. Approach: feasibility of your methods and
     appropriateness of the budget
  3. Innovation: originality of your approach
  4. Investigator: training and experience of
     investigator(s)
  5. Environment: suitability of facilities and adequacy
     of support from your institution
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grants overview
NIH Grant Proposals:

•   Title
•   Abstract
•   Specific Aims
•   Background & Significance
•   Preliminary Studies
•   Experimental Design and Methods
•   Appendix
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Grants help online
NIH Grant Proposals
http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/oer.htm

“All About Grants” tutorials:
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
Writing tips straight from the NIH website:
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
    Summary of NIH grant-writing tips
Tips from the NIH on writing a grant:
1. Write to Your Audience
      A few reviewers will be familiar with your techniques or field, but
       the majority will not be
      Write to teach your audience (like a Scientific American article)
      Write and organize your application so the primary reviewer can
       readily grasp and explain what you are proposing.
      Most likely the other reviewers will read only your abstract,
       significance, and specific aims. Keep these simple and
       nontechnical (big picture).
          All reviewers are important because each reviewer gets one vote.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
   Caveat: “Be very careful with your highly technical
    material. Some of the reviewers may be better
    informed about your field than you. To succeed, you
    will have to be at least as savvy as the savviest
    reviewer in the group. Leave out anything that's not
    critical. The more you put in, the more information
    there is for reviewers to find fault or disagree with.”
 Scientific Writing, HRP 214
 NIH grant-writing tips
2. “Be Persuasive, But Be Careful of Being Too Innovative”
  Tell the reviewers:
   why testing your hypothesis is worth funding
   why you are the person to do it
   how your institution can give you the support you'll need


  The innovation criterion can be tricky:
   Beware of being far outside the mainstream of thought.
   If your proposal is highly innovative, you'll need to make a
    very strong case for why you are challenging the existing
    paradigm and have data to support your innovative approach.
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214
  NIH grant-writing tips
3. Make Life Easy for Reviewers

     ~Make your application user friendly (reviewers get
       worn out having to read 10 to 15 applications!):
      Label all materials clearly

      Keep it short and simple

      Start with basic ideas and move progressively to
       more complex ones (recall inverted pyramid!)
      Guide reviewers with graphics (visually appealing)

      Edit and proofread
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
4. Familiarize yourself with the primary reasons projects don’t
get funded:
       Problem not important enough.
       Study not likely to produce useful information.
       Studies based on a shaky hypothesis or data.
       Alternative hypotheses not considered.
       Methods unsuited to the objective.
       Problem more complex than investigator appears to realize.
       Not significant to health-related research (NIH mission).
       Too little detail in the research plan to convince reviewers
        the investigator knows what he or she is doing (no
        recognition of potential problems and pitfalls).
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
    Proposal driven by technology (i.e., a method in search of a
     problem).
    Issue is scientifically premature.
    Over-ambitious research plan with an unrealistically large
     amount of work.
    Direction or sense of priority not clearly defined (i.e., the
     experiments do not follow from one another), lack a clear
     starting or finishing point.
    Lack of original or new ideas.
    Investigator too inexperienced with the proposed techniques.
    Proposed project a fishing expedition lacking solid scientific
     basis (i.e., no basic scientific question being addressed).
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
    Rationale for experiments not provided (why important, or
     how relevant to the hypothesis).
    Experiments too dependent on success of an initial
     proposed experiment. Lack of alternative methods in case
     the primary approach does not work out.
    Proposed model system not appropriate to address the
     proposed questions.
    Relevant controls not included.
    Proposal lacking enough preliminary data or preliminary
     data do not support project's feasibility.
    Insufficient consideration of statistical needs.
    Not clear which data were obtained by the investigator and
     which reported by others.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
   Write with these pitfalls in mind! Convince the
   reviewers that your project doesn’t have one of
   these fatal flaws (cover all your bases).
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
     5. Write, Edit, and Proof Like a Pro (apply what you’ve
        learned in HRP 214!)
     Straight from the NIH website:
     Start with an outline.
     Write a topic sentence for each main topic.
     Make one point in each paragraph.
                 Paragraphs have two functions: they aggregate information point by point
                 and they break up the page, creating much-needed white space. Keep
                 them short.
     Divide the document into sections and subsections.
     Include bullets and lists.
     Use short sentences with a basic structure: subject, verb,
      object.
          Keep sentence average to 20 words or less. Keep subject, verb, and object
         together at the beginning of the sentence.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
 More tips from the NIH…

    Keep related ideas and information together
    Use strong, active verbs
    Use verbs instead of abstract nouns. Turn abstract nouns
     ending in 'ion' and 'ment' into verbs. For example, say 'creating
     the assay leads to...' rather than 'the creation of the assay leads
     to...'
    If writing is not your forte, get help.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grant-writing tips
6. Edit Before Sending in Your Application
 Edit out redundant words and phrases (cut, cut, cut!)
 Get outside opinions on the writing and presentation.
 Cross-check all data and information for consistency.
 After you're finished, leave it for a few days, then go back and read
   it again.
 Highlight and review your conclusions.
       Is there any way your supporting facts might lead a reader to different
        conclusions?
   Make sure you've supported all facts with citations.
   Edit and proofread thoroughly.
   Have others proofread as well, including nonscientists with strong
    English skills (work with a good editor!)
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH grants overview
NIH Grant Proposals:
• Title
• Abstract
• Specific Aims
• Background & Significance
• Preliminary Studies
• Experimental Design and Methods
• Appendix
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals
• Title
  Scientific Writing, HRP 214
  Title
•Keep to word or character limit (NIH has 56-character limit, including
the spaces between words and punctuation).

•Identify topics, purpose, and novel aspects or methodology

•Choose a title that is specifically descriptive, rather than general.

•Be accurate, complete, specific, and concise.

•Avoid jargon, unnecessary details, and abbreviations.

•A new application must have a different title from any other PHS
project with the same principal investigator/program director.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals
• Abstract
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
    Abstract
Abstract
• 200 word limit for NIH
• Keep it simple and broad. The abstract is read by all of the
    reviewers and is of critical importance.
Includes:
1. Broad research question
2. Hypothesis to be tested (*remember NIH primarily funds
    hypothesis-driven research)
3. Overview of specific aims
4. Statement of the significance of the research and how it is
    innovative
5. Outline of the methods

Excludes
confidential or proprietary information
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals

• Specific Aims
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Specific Aims
Specific Aims
• One page is recommended.
• Limit to 3 or 4 specific aims.
• The specific aims are read by all of the reviewers and are
  of critical importance. Write in clear, focused, non-technical
  terms.

The Specific Aims are a list of:
  The broad, long-term objectives and what the specific research
  proposed in this application is intended to accomplish, e.g..:
      to test a stated hypothesis,
      to create a novel design,
      to solve a specific problem, OR
      to develop new technology
Specific Aims formats, prepared by:


Lorene Nelson, PhD
Associate Professor
Chief, Division of Epidemiology
Department of Health Research and Policy
Stanford University School of Medicine
Alternative 1
State overall objective

. . . We propose to address this objective by testing the following
      hypotheses:
      1. <hypothesis 1>
      2. <hypothesis 2>
      3. <hypothesis 3>
      4. <hypothesis 4>    (maximum of 3-4 hypotheses)

. . . To test these hypotheses, we will address the following
      specific aims:
      1. <specific aim 1>
      2. <specific aim 2>
      3. <specific aim 3>
      4. <specific aim 4> (maximum of 3-4 specific aims)
Alternative 2
The primary study objective is to <describe>, and will address 3
   hypotheses of interest:

Hypothesis 1: Describe hypothesis or state as question.
   Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis
   State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis

Hypothesis 2: Describe hypothesis or state as question.
   Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis
   State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis

Hypothesis 3: Describe hypothesis or state as question.
   Briefly describe method or approach to address hypothesis
   State expected gains in knowledge by addressing hypothesis

Can include 1-2 secondary hypotheses if absolutely necessary.
Alternative 3
State overall objective

Specific Aim # 1: To <describe primary aim>
   Put specific aim in context of literature or state significance
   State hypothesis (can do in form of a question)
   Briefly describe method or innovative approach to address SA

Specific Aim # 2: To <describe primary aim>
   Put specific aim in context of literature or state significance
   State hypothesis (can do in form of a question)
   Briefly describe method or innovative approach to address SA

Specific Aim # 3: (try to limit to 2-3 primary aims)

Can include 1-2 secondary specific aims if absolutely necessary.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals



• Background & Significance
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
    Background & Significance
Background and Significance

•       One to two pages recommended
•       This is NOT a literature review
•       Do not attempt to be exhaustive; limit to 30-50 key citations
•       Tell it like a story

Critical Elements:
1. Briefly sketch the pivotal work leading up to yours
2. Critically evaluate existing knowledge
3. Specifically identify the gaps that the project is intended to fill
4. State concisely the importance and health relevance of the
     research.
    •      Note: this does not mean convincing the researchers that the disease to
           which the research relates is significant.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals




• Preliminary Studies
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Preliminary Studies
Preliminary Studies

•   Preliminary data are an essential part of a research grant
    application. They establish the ability of you and your
    research team to carry out the proposed studies.

Critical Elements:
1. Provide an account of the principal investigator/program
    director's preliminary studies pertinent to the application
2. Establish the experience and competence of the investigator
3. Help reviewers assess the likelihood of success of the
    proposed project.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals




• Experimental Design and Methods
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
    Experimental Design and Methods
Experimental Design and Methods
• Describe the research design and the procedures to be used
   to accomplish the specific aims of the project.

•   Note: 12-page limit for the complete “Research Plan”
    (background & significance, preliminary studies, and
    experimental design and methods).
    Scientific Writing, HRP 214
    Experimental Design and Methods
Experimental Design and Methods

Describe:
1.     How the data will be collected
2.     How the data will be analyzed and interpreted (statistics)
3.     Data sharing plans as appropriate
4.     Any new methodologies and their advantages
5.     Potential difficulties and limitations of the proposed procedures
6.     Any hazardous procedures, situations, or materials that may be
       and the precautions that will be followed to maximize safety


Also, provide a tentative sequence or timetable for the project.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
NIH Grant Proposals




• Appendix
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Appendix
Appendix materials may include:
1. Up to 10 publications, manuscripts (accepted for
   publication), abstracts, patents, or other printed materials
   directly relevant to this project.
2. Surveys, questionnaires, data collection instruments, and
   clinical protocols.
3. Original glossy photographs or color images of gels,
   micrographs, etc., IF a photocopy (may be reduced in size) is
   also included within the 12-page limit of the research plan.

    Note: Do not use the appendix to circumvent the page
    limitations of the research plan.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Top 5
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


1.   Eminent, imminent, immanent

Eminent: outstanding, famous
Imminent: about to happen
Immanent: inherent (often religious context)

The book was written by an eminent authority.
Given the latest clashes, the war was clearly imminent.
He believed in the immanent unity of nature taught by the Hindus.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


2.   Emigrate and immigrate


Emigrate is to move out of a country.
Immigrate is to move into a country.

She emigrated from Poland and immigrated to the United
    States.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


3.   Epidemic, endemic, pandemic
Epidemic: describes a disease that quickly and severely affects lots of
     people and then subsides (From Greek: epi= upon +
     demos=people: literally ‘upon the people’)
Endemic: describes a disease that is continually present in an area and
     affects a relatively small number of people (en=within +
     demos=people; means ‘native’)
Pandemic: describes a widespread epidemic that may affect entire
     continents or even the world (pan=all + demos=people: literally
     ‘all people’)

There was an epidemic of SARS in Hong Kong last month.
Malaria is endemic to that part of South Africa.
AIDS is a pandemic.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214


4. Flaunt and flout


Flaunt is to display ostentatiously
Flout is to openly disregard


The dot-com millionaires liked to flaunt their wealth.
The pharma industry flouts authorship rules for medical
    journals. (recent headline)
Scientific Writing, HRP 214

 5.   Sex and gender

 Use sex for biological differences
 Use gender for cultural or social differences

 They determined the sex of the organism from a karyotype.
 He flouted traditional gender roles by being a stay-at-home
      dad.
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
  BONUS TOPIC: redundancy

  Which are redundant?
  HIV virus
  G6PD deficiency
  ROC curve
  SAS software

  And with a little international flair…
  Rio Grande river
  Sierra Nevada mountains
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
 BONUS TOPIC: redundancy
 YES:
 HIV virus—human immunodeficiency virus virus
 Rio Grande river—Big River river
 Sierra Nevada mountains—Sawtoothed Mountain
     Range Covered in Snow mountains
 NO:
 G6PD deficiency—glucose-6-phosphate
    dehydrogenase deficiency
 ROC curve—receiver operator characteristic curve
 SAS software—statistical analysis system software
Scientific Writing, HRP 214
Homework for next time…
Assignments for next week:
 Read:
  •   Chapter 8 in Successful Science Writing


(3 units)
Discussion section due today or later this week.
  Conferences on discussions.

								
To top