research project summary cihr example

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Summary

Definition:

A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings. It is often used as a tool to quickly communicate the main findings of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or decision-makers.

Structure of Research Summary

The Structure of a Research Summary typically include:

• Introduction : This section provides a brief background of the research problem or question, explains the purpose of the study, and outlines the research objectives.
• Methodology : This section explains the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. It describes the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Results : This section presents the main findings of the study, including statistical analysis if applicable. It may include tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains their implications. It discusses the significance of the findings, compares them to previous research, and identifies any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclusion : This section summarizes the main points of the research and provides a conclusion based on the findings. It may also suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• References : This section lists the sources cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

How to Write Research Summary

Here are the steps you can follow to write a research summary:

• Read the research article or study thoroughly: To write a summary, you must understand the research article or study you are summarizing. Therefore, read the article or study carefully to understand its purpose, research design, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Identify the main points : Once you have read the research article or study, identify the main points, key findings, and research question. You can highlight or take notes of the essential points and findings to use as a reference when writing your summary.
• Write the introduction: Start your summary by introducing the research problem, research question, and purpose of the study. Briefly explain why the research is important and its significance.
• Summarize the methodology : In this section, summarize the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. Explain the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Present the results: Summarize the main findings of the study. Use tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data if necessary.
• Interpret the results: In this section, interpret the results and explain their implications. Discuss the significance of the findings, compare them to previous research, and identify any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclude the summary : Summarize the main points of the research and provide a conclusion based on the findings. Suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• Revise and edit : Once you have written the summary, revise and edit it to ensure that it is clear, concise, and free of errors. Make sure that your summary accurately represents the research article or study.
• Add references: Include a list of references cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

Example of Research Summary

Here is an example of a research summary:

Title: The Effects of Yoga on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: This meta-analysis examines the effects of yoga on mental health. The study aimed to investigate whether yoga practice can improve mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, stress, and quality of life.

Methodology : The study analyzed data from 14 randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of yoga on mental health outcomes. The sample included a total of 862 participants. The yoga interventions varied in length and frequency, ranging from four to twelve weeks, with sessions lasting from 45 to 90 minutes.

Results : The meta-analysis found that yoga practice significantly improved mental health outcomes. Participants who practiced yoga showed a significant reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as stress levels. Quality of life also improved in those who practiced yoga.

Discussion : The findings of this study suggest that yoga can be an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. The study supports the growing body of evidence that suggests that yoga can have a positive impact on mental health. Limitations of the study include the variability of the yoga interventions, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

Conclusion : Overall, the findings of this meta-analysis support the use of yoga as an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the optimal length and frequency of yoga interventions for different populations.

References :

• Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Langhorst, J., Dobos, G., & Berger, B. (2013). Yoga for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Depression and anxiety, 30(11), 1068-1083.
• Khalsa, S. B. (2004). Yoga as a therapeutic intervention: a bibliometric analysis of published research studies. Indian journal of physiology and pharmacology, 48(3), 269-285.
• Ross, A., & Thomas, S. (2010). The health benefits of yoga and exercise: a review of comparison studies. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 16(1), 3-12.

Purpose of Research Summary

The purpose of a research summary is to provide a brief overview of a research project or study, including its main points, findings, and conclusions. The summary allows readers to quickly understand the essential aspects of the research without having to read the entire article or study.

Research summaries serve several purposes, including:

• Facilitating comprehension: A research summary allows readers to quickly understand the main points and findings of a research project or study without having to read the entire article or study. This makes it easier for readers to comprehend the research and its significance.
• Communicating research findings: Research summaries are often used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public. The summary presents the essential aspects of the research in a clear and concise manner, making it easier for non-experts to understand.
• Supporting decision-making: Research summaries can be used to support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. This information can be used by policymakers or practitioners to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Saving time: Research summaries save time for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders who need to review multiple research studies. Rather than having to read the entire article or study, they can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.

Characteristics of Research Summary

The following are some of the key characteristics of a research summary:

• Concise : A research summary should be brief and to the point, providing a clear and concise overview of the main points of the research.
• Objective : A research summary should be written in an objective tone, presenting the research findings without bias or personal opinion.
• Comprehensive : A research summary should cover all the essential aspects of the research, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research summary should accurately reflect the key findings and conclusions of the research.
• Clear and well-organized: A research summary should be easy to read and understand, with a clear structure and logical flow.
• Relevant : A research summary should focus on the most important and relevant aspects of the research, highlighting the key findings and their implications.
• Audience-specific: A research summary should be tailored to the intended audience, using language and terminology that is appropriate and accessible to the reader.
• Citations : A research summary should include citations to the original research articles or studies, allowing readers to access the full text of the research if desired.

When to write Research Summary

Here are some situations when it may be appropriate to write a research summary:

• Proposal stage: A research summary can be included in a research proposal to provide a brief overview of the research aims, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.
• Conference presentation: A research summary can be prepared for a conference presentation to summarize the main findings of a study or research project.
• Journal submission: Many academic journals require authors to submit a research summary along with their research article or study. The summary provides a brief overview of the study’s main points, findings, and conclusions and helps readers quickly understand the research.
• Funding application: A research summary can be included in a funding application to provide a brief summary of the research aims, objectives, and expected outcomes.
• Policy brief: A research summary can be prepared as a policy brief to communicate research findings to policymakers or stakeholders in a concise and accessible manner.

Advantages of Research Summary

Research summaries offer several advantages, including:

• Time-saving: A research summary saves time for readers who need to understand the key findings and conclusions of a research project quickly. Rather than reading the entire research article or study, readers can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.
• Clarity and accessibility: A research summary provides a clear and accessible overview of the research project’s main points, making it easier for readers to understand the research without having to be experts in the field.
• Improved comprehension: A research summary helps readers comprehend the research by providing a brief and focused overview of the key findings and conclusions, making it easier to understand the research and its significance.
• Enhanced communication: Research summaries can be used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public, in a concise and accessible manner.
• Facilitated decision-making: Research summaries can support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. Policymakers or practitioners can use this information to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Increased dissemination: Research summaries can be easily shared and disseminated, allowing research findings to reach a wider audience.

Limitations of Research Summary

Limitations of the Research Summary are as follows:

• Limited scope: Research summaries provide a brief overview of the research project’s main points, findings, and conclusions, which can be limiting. They may not include all the details, nuances, and complexities of the research that readers may need to fully understand the study’s implications.
• Risk of oversimplification: Research summaries can be oversimplified, reducing the complexity of the research and potentially distorting the findings or conclusions.
• Lack of context: Research summaries may not provide sufficient context to fully understand the research findings, such as the research background, methodology, or limitations. This may lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the research.
• Possible bias: Research summaries may be biased if they selectively emphasize certain findings or conclusions over others, potentially distorting the overall picture of the research.
• Format limitations: Research summaries may be constrained by the format or length requirements, making it challenging to fully convey the research’s main points, findings, and conclusions.
• Accessibility: Research summaries may not be accessible to all readers, particularly those with limited literacy skills, visual impairments, or language barriers.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Questions – Types, Examples and Writing...

Thesis – Structure, Example and Writing Guide

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Research Project – Definition, Writing Guide and...

CIHR Project Grant Updates

~tania watts, cihr delegate, important updates to the cihr spring project grant competition.

There have been several updates to the CIHR Spring Project Grant Competition, including new formatting rules and changes to the types of materials that may be appended to applications. Please review the information below and on the CIHR Project Grant webpage carefully.

Spring Project Grant Competition

For questions concerning the Spring Project Grant Competition, please reach out to our CIHR delegate, Tania Watts .

Important Dates

• Registration deadline:  February 7, 2024
• Internal deadline for MRA form - University of Toronto- February 28
• Application deadline:  March 6, 2024
• Release of Notice of Recommendation:  July 3, 2024
• Release of Notice of Decision:  July 17, 2024
• Funding Start date:  October 1, 2024

How to Apply

• Review the CIHR resources on how to prepare your grant  
• Review the application instructions

Note: You may only submit 2 applications per project competition as a Nominated Principal applicant; any additional applications will be withdrawn based on date submitted .

New! Changes to Appendices

The following appendices are no longer allowed:

• manuscripts
• publications
• extra figures, tables, or consent forms

Additional details from  CIHR  are quoted below in italics, for reference. 

For the Spring 2024 Project Grant competition:

"CIHR will be limiting the types of materials that researchers can attach to their applications. We understand the desire to round out applications with supporting materials and additional preliminary data, but we wish to underscore that all research proposals should be written in such a way that they stand alone. That means that they should contain all the information required to support the assessment of the research plan and contain a complete description of the project."

Note:  detailed rationale is provided on the CIHR website .

"Starting with the Spring 2024 Project Grant competition, the following attachments will no longer be accepted and if included, will be removed from the application:

• Questionnaires, surveys, and consent forms
• Supplementary tables, charts, figures, and photographs
• Patient Information Sheets (for Randomized Controlled Trial applications)
• Publications

Some attachments will continue to be mandatory, such as certificates of completion for sex- and gender-based analysis training modules and letters of community support from Indigenous partners as applicable.

Others will be optional, such as letters of collaboration that outline a specific service that will be provided such as access to equipment, provision of specific reagents, training in a specialized technique, statistical analysis, access to a patient population, etc., and additional CV information to account for any leaves, absences, illnesses, caregiving roles, etc."

Please consult the  Project Grant application instructions  for more information.

Suggestion from your CIHR delegate:  If you want to show evidence of productivity, but data do not fit in the grant, you could upload your manuscript to a preprint server such as BioRXIV or MedRXIV and list it in the reference list. Although the reviewer is not required to look at the pre-print, at least they will be able to find it if they wish to look at specifics or evidence of productivity.

New! Updated Formatting Rules

• The requirement to use Times new roman was introduced last year

"CIHR has simplified its attachment formatting requirements. The following apply to all applicant-prepared attachments  (those you upload as a PDF, such as the proposal and summary of progress)  and must be followed to ensure readability and fairness. Letters of collaboration are not required to conform to these formatting rules.

• Use a 12 point, Times New Roman font in black type. Do not use condensed fonts.
• You may use other fonts and font sizes for text in tables, charts, figures, graphs and legends only, as long as it is legible when the page is viewed at 100%.
• Use a minimum of single line spacing. Do not use narrow line spacing.
• Use normal/standard character spacing. Do not use condensed character spacing.
• Insert a margin of 2 cm (0.79 inch) – minimum – around all pages.
• Observe page limitations. Additional pages may NOT be added unless specified.
• Use only letter size (21.59 X 27.94 cm / 8.5" X 11"), white paper/background for all attachments.
• Attachments must be uploaded in PDF format (unprotected). It is important to confirm that the final PDF document complies with the formatting requirements."

Last competition, 14% of applications had formatting infractions of some kind. We are told that warnings were sent to those with infractions. As of spring 2024 competition,  "CIHR reserves the right to immediately withdraw your application if it does not meet these requirements."

Priority Announcements

• Don't forget to look for Priority Announcements in your area!
• Review FAQs

“Priority Announcements (PAs) offer additional sources of funding for highly rated applications that are relevant to specific research areas. They can be in the form of grants or prizes. The PAs outline specific research areas relevant to CIHR Institutes, Initiatives and Partners, and applications that align with those areas may be selected for funding – without having to re-apply. Prizes are supplemental grant funds to support research, they are not a personal award.”

Note that these are updated each year and appear only in the full application (not at registration). It is possible to submit a grant without filling in the Priority Announcement section, as its optional, so you need to actively seek these out. For example, some institutes create $100,000 1-year bridge grants for those grants that just missed funding; these are listed in the Priority Announcement and can range from quite general to highly specific. You can submit to more than 1 Priority Announcement- you are required to fill out a relevance form for each Priority Announcement selected. These are awarded to highest scoring unfunded grants in the competition that have relevance to the particular Priority Announcement.

What to Put in the Summary of Progress

The Summary of Progress, uploaded as a 2-page PDF,

“is a narrative that will allow you to describe the reason you are requesting funding for your proposed project in the context of your broader research activities. It is not expected that applicants will provide a detailed accounting of their research history but rather, only what is relevant to the current application. It should include progress made on your research to date (including contextualizing research activities, contributions and impacts that support your current application) and any impacts on the progress of your research. Tables, figures or graphs are not permitted in the Summary of Progress. It is suggested to not duplicate the information found in your ‘Significant Contributions’ section or CV. Additionally, please note that all information necessary to adjudicate the science of your research proposal must be found in the research proposal (i.e., the Summary of Progress is not to be used as an extension to your proposal).

“When contextualizing the amount requested vis-à-vis your funding profile, you do not need to list all grants currently or previously held or duplicate what is already found in your CCV but rather include information that helps inform and convince reviewers that this funding is needed and how it fits in to the overall research program. Any pending applications under review (CIHR or other source of funding) related to the current submission should be indicated in the Summary of Progress to help reviewers understand any potential funding overlap. It will be incumbent on the applicant to illustrate clearly to reviewers why the requested funds are needed, how they are distinct from the funds currently held, and how they will advance research.”

Including Sex and Gender Considerations in your Research Proposal

Additional details from  CIHR  are quoted below in italics, for reference.

“In their evaluation of the application, peer reviewers assess whether or not sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) is a strength, weakness, or not applicable; this is to be reflected within their written evaluation and the overall score assigned to the application.” 

Reviewers are instructed to not only look at the specific text box on sex and gender, but to note whether sex and gender considerations, if relevant, are incorporated into the main proposal as part of the research plan.

Information Sessions

CIHR will be hosting the following webinars to support participants with the requirements of the funding opportunity “ Project Grant Spring 2024 ” and to answer questions on how to apply. The sessions are 60 minutes long and registration is not required.  

• Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 11:00 am ET |  Join  (English)
• Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 1:00 pm ET |  Join  (French)
• Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 11:00 am ET |  Join  (French)
• Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 1:00 pm ET |  Join  (English)

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
• Indian J Dermatol
• v.62(5); Sep-Oct 2017

Summary and Synthesis: How to Present a Research Proposal

Maninder singh setia.

From the MGM Institute of Health Sciences, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Saumya Panda

1 Department of Dermatology, KPC Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

This concluding module attempts to synthesize the key learning points discussed during the course of the previous ten sets of modules on methodology and biostatistics. The objective of this module is to discuss how to present a model research proposal, based on whatever was discussed in the preceding modules. The lynchpin of a research proposal is the protocol, and the key component of a protocol is the study design. However, one must not neglect the other areas, be it the project summary through which one catches the eyes of the reviewer of the proposal, or the background and the literature review, or the aims and objectives of the study. Two critical areas in the “methods” section that cannot be emphasized more are the sampling strategy and a formal estimation of sample size. Without a legitimate sample size, none of the conclusions based on the statistical analysis would be valid. Finally, the ethical parameters of the study should be well understood by the researchers, and that should get reflected in the proposal.

As we reach the end of an exhaustive module encompassing research methods and biostatistics, we need to summarize and synthesize the key learning points, to demonstrate how one may utilize the different sections of the module to undertake research projects of different kinds. After all, the practical purpose behind publishing such a module is to facilitate the preparation of high quality research proposals and protocols. This concluding part will make an attempt to provide a window to the different sections of the module, underlining the various aspects of design and analysis needed to formulate protocols applicable to different kinds of clinical research in dermatology.

Components of a Research Proposal

The goal of a research proposal is to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. A research proposal is generally meant to be presented by an investigator to request an agency or a body to support research work in the form of grants. The vast majority of research proposals, in India, however, are not submitted to agency or body for grants, simply because of the paucity of such agencies, bodies, and research grants. Most are academic research proposals, self-financed, and submitted to scientific and ethics committee of an institution. The parts of a proposal include the title page, abstract/project summary, table of contents, introduction, background and review of literature, and the research protocol.

The title page should contain the personal data pertaining to the investigators, and title of the project, which should be concise and comprehensive at the same time. The table of contents, strictly speaking, is not necessary for short proposals. The introduction includes a statement of the problem, purpose, and significance of the research.

The protocol is the document that specifies the research plan. It is the single most important quality control tool for all aspects of a clinical research. It is the instrument where the researcher explains how data will be collected, including the calculation for estimating sample size, and what outcome variables to measure.

A complete clinical research protocol includes the following:

Study design

• Precise definition of the disease or problem
• Completely defined prespecified primary and secondary outcome measures, including how and when these will be assessed
• Clear description of variables
• Well-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Efficacy and safety parameters
• Whenever applicable, stopping guidelines and parameters of interim analyses
• Sample size calculation
• Randomization details
• Plan of statistical analysis
• Detailed description of interventions
• A chronogram of research flow (Gantt chart)
• Informed consent document
• Clinical research form
• Details of budget; and
• References.

(Modified from: Bagatin et al ., 2013).

Project Summary

The project summary is a brief document that consists of an overview, and discusses the intellectual merits, and broader impacts of the research project. Each of these three sections is required to be present and must be clearly defined. The project summary is one of the most important parts of the proposal. It is likely the first thing a reviewer will read, and is the investigators’ best chance to grab their interest, and convince them of the importance, and quality, of their research before they even read the proposal. Though it is the first proposal element in order, many applicants prefer to write the project summary last, after writing the protocol. This allows the writer to better avoid any inconsistencies between the two.

The overview specifies the research goal and it should demonstrate that this goal fits with the principal investigator's long-term research goals. It should specify the proposed research approach and the educational goal of the research project.

The intellectual merits (the contribution your research will make to your field) should specify the current state of knowledge in the field, and where it is headed. It should also clarify what your research will add to the state of knowledge in the field. Furthermore, important to state is what your research will do to enhance or enable other researches in the field. Finally, one should answer why your research is important for the advancement of the field.

The broader impacts (the contribution the research will make to the society) should answer the questions on the benefit to the society at large from the research, and the possible applications of the research, and why the general public would care. It should also clarify how the research can benefit the site of research (medical college or university, etc.) and the funding agency.

Background and Review of Literature

This is an important component of the research protocol. The review should discuss all the relevant literature, the method used in the literature, the lacunae in the literature, and justify the proposed research. We have provided a list of the useful databases in the section on systematic reviews and meta-analysis (Setia, 2017). Some of these are PubMed, Cochrane database, EMBASE, and LILACS.

Provide a critical analysis of the literature

The researcher should not provide a descriptive analysis of literature. For instance, the literature reviews should not be a list of one article followed by the next article. It should be a critical analysis of literature.

A study by XXXX et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 20%. It was a hospital-based study conducted in North India. The prevalence was 35% in males and 12% in females.

Another study by YYYYY et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 14%. The study was conducted in a private clinic in North India. The prevalence was 8% in males and 18% in females.

A third study by ZZZZZ et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 5%. This study was a community-based study. The prevalence was 7% in males and 3% in females.

In this type of review, the researcher has described all the studies. However, it is useful to understand the findings of these three studies and summarize them in researcher's own words.

A possible option can be “ The reported prevalence of psoriasis in the Indian population varied from 5% to 20%. In general, it was higher in hospital-based studies and lower in community-based studies. There was no consistent pattern in the prevalence of psoriasis in males and females. Though some studies found the prevalence to be higher in males, others reported that females had a higher prevalence .”

Discuss the limitations and lacunae of these studies

The researcher should discuss the limitations of the studies. These could be the limitations that the authors have presented in the manuscript or the ones that the researcher has identified. Usually, the current research proposal should try to address the limitations of a previous study.

A study by BBBB et al : “ One of the main limitations of our study was the lack of objective criteria for assessing anemia in patients presenting with psoriasis. We classified the patients based on clinical assessment of pallor .”

The present proposal can mention “ Though previous studies have assessed the association between anemia and psoriasis, they have not used any objective criteria (such as hemoglobin or serum ferritin levels). Furthermore, pallor was evaluated by three clinicians; the authors have not described the agreement between these clinicians .”

In the above example, the authors have stated the limitation of their research in the manuscript. However, in the review of literature, the researcher has added another limitation. It is important to convince the reviewers that the researcher has read and understood the literature. It is also important that some or most of these lacunae should be addressed in the present proposal as far as possible.

Justify the present proposal by review

The researcher should adequately justify the present proposal based on the review of literature. The justification should not only be for the research question, but also the methods, study design, variables of interest, study instruments or measurements, and statistical methods of choice. Sometimes, the justification can be purely statistical. For example, all the previous studies have used cross-sectional data or cross-sectional analysis of longitudinal data in their manuscripts. The present proposal will use methods used for longitudinal data analysis. The researcher should justify the benefit of these methods over the previous statistical methods.

In short, the review should not be a “laundry list” of all the articles. The review should be able to convince the reader that the present research is required and it builds on the existing literature (either as a novel research question, new measurement of the outcome, a better study design, or advanced and appropriate statistical methods).

Kindly try to avoid this justification: “ It has not been done in our center .”

Aims and Objectives

The “aim” of the study is an overarching goal of the study. The objectives are measurable and help the researcher achieve the overall aim.

For example, the overall aim of our study is to assess the long-term health of patients of psoriasis.

The specific objectives are:

• To record the changes in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score in patients with psoriasis over a period of 5 years
• To study the side effects of medications in these patients over a period of 5 years.

It is important to clearly state the objectives, since the research proposal should be designed to achieve these objectives.

For example, the methods should describe the following:

• How will the researcher answer the first objective?
• Where will the researcher recruit the study participants (study site and population)?
• Which patients of psoriasis will be recruited (inclusion and exclusion criteria)?
• What will be the design of the study (cohort, etc.)?
• What are all the variables to be measured to achieve the study outcomes (exposure and outcome variables)?
• How will the researcher measure these variables (clinical evaluation, history, serological examination, etc.)?
• How will the researcher record these data (clinical forms, etc.)?
• How will the researcher analyze the data that have been collected?
• Are there any limitations of these methods? If so, what has the researcher done to minimize the limitations?

All the ten modules on research methodology have to be read and grasped to plan and design any kind of research applicable to one's chosen field. However, some key areas have been outlined below with examples to appreciate the same in an easier manner.

The study setting must be specified. This should include both the geographical location and the population from which the study sample would be recruited.

“The study took place at the antiretroviral therapy clinic of Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Blantyre, Malawi, from January 2006 to April 2007. Blantyre is the major commercial city of Malawi, with a population of 1,000,000 and an estimated HIV prevalence of 27% in adults in 2004” (Ndekha et al ., 2009).

This is a perfect example of description of a study setting which underscores the importance of planning it in detail a priori .

Study population, sampling strategy, and sample size

Study population has to be clearly and precisely defined. For example, a study on atopic dermatitis may be conducted upon patients defined according to the UK Working Party's modified diagnostic criteria, or the Hanifin and Rajka's criteria, or some other criteria defined by the investigators. However, it should always be prespecified within the protocol.

Similarly, the eligibility criteria of the participants for the study must be explicit. One truism that is frequently forgotten is that the inclusion and exclusion criteria are mutually exclusive, and one is not the negative image of the other. Eligible cases are included according to a set of inclusion criteria, and this is followed by administration of the exclusion criteria. Thus, in fact, they can never be the negative image of each other.

“Eligible participants were all adults aged 18 or over with HIV who met the eligibility criteria for antiretroviral therapy according to the Malawian national HIV treatment guidelines (WHO clinical stage III or IV or any WHO stage with a CD4 count < 250/mm 3 ) and who were starting treatment with a BMI < 18.5. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy and lactation or participation in another supplementary feeding program” (Ndekha et al ., 2009).

To put in perspective the point we made about inclusion and exclusion criteria, in the above example, “age above 18 years” or “CD4 count >250/mm 3 ” cannot be exclusion criteria, as these have already been excluded.

Sampling strategy has been adequately discussed in the Module 5 of the Methodology series (Setia, 2016). A few points are worth repeating:

• The sampling strategy should never be misrepresented. Example: If you have not done random sampling, no big deal. There are other legitimate sampling strategies available for your study. But once you have mentioned “random sampling” in your protocol, you cannot resort to purposive sampling
• Sometimes, the researcher might want to know the characteristics of a certain problem within a specific population, without caring for generalizability of results. In such a scenario, purposive sampling may be resorted to
• Nonprobability sampling methods such as consecutive consenting sampling or any such convenience sampling are perfectly legitimate and easy to do, particularly in case of dissertations where time and resources are limited.

Sample size is one of the most misunderstood, yet fundamentally important, issues among clinicians and has to be addressed once the study objectives have been set and the design has been finalized. Too small a sample means that there would be a failure to detect change following test intervention. A sample larger than necessary may also result in bad quality data. In either case, there would be ethical problems and wastage of resources. The researcher needs just enough samples to draw accurate inferences, which would be adequately powered (Panda, 2015).

Estimation of sample size has been dealt with adequately in the Module 5 biostatistics series (Hazra et al ., 2016), including the different mathematical derivations and the available software. Sample size determination is a statistical exercise based on the probability of errors in testing of hypothesis, power of the sample, and effect size. Although, relatively speaking, these are simple concepts to grasp, a large number of different study designs and analytical methods lead to a bewilderingly large number of formulae for determining sample size. Thus, the software are really handy and are becoming increasingly popular.

The study design defines the objectives and end points of the study, the type and manner of data collection, and the strategy of data analysis (Panda 2015). The different types of clinical studies have been depicted in Figure 1 . The suitability of various study designs vis-à-vis different types of research questions is summarized in Table 1 .

Types of study (Source: Panda, 2015)

Research questions vis-a-vis study designs

In our previous series of ten modules on methodology, we have discussed all these different kinds of studies and more. Some key issues that require reiteration are given below:

• The control of a case–control study and that of a randomized controlled trial is more different from each other than chalk is from cheese. The former is an observational study, while the latter is an interventional one. Every study with a control group is not a case–control study. For a study to be classified as a case–control study, the study should be an observational study and the participants should be recruited based on their outcome status (Setia, 2016). Apparently, this is not so difficult to understand, yet even now we have publications which confuse between the different kinds of controls (Bhanja et al ., 2015)
• Due to the fact that the outcome and exposure are assessed at the same time point in a cross-sectional study, it is pretty difficult, if not impossible, to derive causal relationships from such a study. At most, one may establish statistical association between exposures and outcomes by calculating the odds ratio. However, these associations must not be confused with causation.
• It is generally said that a cohort design may not be efficient for rare outcomes. However, if the rare outcome is common in some exposures, it may be useful to follow a cohort design. For example, melanoma is a rare condition in India. Hence, if we follow individuals to study the incidence of melanoma, it may not be efficient. However, if we know that, in India, acral lentiginous melanoma is the most commonly reported variant, we should follow a cohort of individuals with acral lentiginous and study the incidence of melanoma in this group (Setia, 2016).

Clinical researchers should also be accustomed with observational designs beyond case–control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies. Sometimes, the unit of analysis has to be a group or aggregate rather than the individual. Consider the following example:

The government introduced the supplementation of salt with iodine for about 20 years. However, not all states have used the same level of iodine in salt. Certain hilly states have used higher quantities compared with other states. Incidentally, you read a report that high iodine levels are associated with psoriasis. You are intrigued to find if introduction of iodine has altered the picture of psoriasis in the country. You feel compelled to design a study to answer this question .

It is obvious that here the unit of study cannot be individuals, but a large population distributed in a certain geographical area. This is the domain of ecologic studies. An allied category of observational studies is named “natural experiments,” where the exposure is not assigned by the investigator (as in an interventional study), but through “natural processes.” These may be through changes in the existing regulations or public policies or, may be, through introduction of new laws (Setia, 2017).

Another category of research questions that cannot be satisfactorily captured by all the quantitative methods described earlier, like social stigma experienced by patients or their families with, say, vitiligo, leprosy, or sexually transmitted infections, are best dealt with by qualitative research. As can be seen by the examples given above, this is a type of research which is very relevant to medical research, yet to which the regular medical researcher has got a very poor exposure, if any. We shall encourage interested researchers to take a look at the 10 th Module of the Methodology series that specifically deals with qualitative research (Setia, 2017).

Clinical studies are experiments that are not conducted in laboratories but in controlled real-life settings on human subjects with some disease. Hence, designing a study involves many pragmatic considerations aside pure methodology. Thus, factors to consider when selecting a study design are objectives of the study, time frame, treatment duration, carryover effects, cost and logistics, patient convenience, statistical considerations, sample size, etc. (Panda, 2015).

Certain truisms regarding study designs should always be remembered: a study design has to be tailored to objectives. The same question may be answered by different designs. The optimum design has to be based on workforce, budgetary allocation, infrastructure, and clinical material that may be commanded by the researchers. Finally, no design is perfect, and there is no design to provide a perfect answer to all research questions relevant to a particular problem (Panda, 2015).

Variables of interest and collection of these variables

Data structure depends on the characteristics of the variables [ Figure 2 ]. A variable refers to a particular character on which a set of data are recorded. Data are thus the values of a variable (Hazra et al ., 2016).

Types of data and variables (Source: Panda, 2015)

Quantitative data always have a proportional scale among values, and can be either discrete (e.g., number of moles) or continuous (e.g., age). Qualitative data can be either nominal (e.g., blood groups) or ordinal (e.g., Fitzpatrick's phototypes I-VI). Variables can be binary or dichotomous (male/female) or multinomial or polychotomous (homosexual/bisexual/heterosexual) (Panda, 2015).

Changing data scales is possible so that numerical data may become ordinal and ordinal data may become nominal. This may be done when the researcher is not confident about the accuracy of the measuring instrument, is unconcerned about the loss of fine detail, or where group numbers are not large enough to adequately represent a variable of interest. It may also make clinical interpretation easier (Hazra et al ., 2016).

The variables whose effects are observed on other variables are known as independent variables (e.g., risk factors). The latter kind of variables that change as a result of independent variables are known as dependent variables (i.e., outcome). Confounders are those variables that influence the relation between independent and dependent variables (e.g., the clinical effect of sunscreen used as part of a test intervention regimen in melasma). If the researcher fails to control or eliminate the confounder, it will damage the internal validity of an experiment (Panda, 2015).

Biostatistics begins with descriptive statistics that implies summarizing a collection of data from a sample or population. An excellent overview of descriptive statistics has been given in the Module 1 of the Biostatistics series (Hazra et al ., 2016). We would encourage every researcher to embark on designing and collecting data on their own to go through this particular module to have a clear idea on how to proceed further.

Statistical methods

As briefly discussed earlier, the “methods” section should also include a detailed description of statistical methods. It is best to describe the methods for each objective.

For example: Which statistical methods will the researcher use to study the changes in PASI score over time?

It is important to first identify the nature of the outcome – will it be linear or categorical?

• It may be noticed that the PASI is a score and can range from 0 to 72. The researcher can measure the actual score and assess the changes in score. Thus, the researcher will use methods for statistical analysis of continuous data (such as means, standard deviations, t -test, or linear regressions)
• However, the researcher may choose to cut off the PASI score at 60 (of course, there has to be justification!) and call it severe psoriasis. Thus, the researcher will have an outcome variable with two outcomes (Yes: >60 PASI, and No: <60 PASI). Thus, in this case, the researcher will use methods for statistical analysis of categorical data (proportions, Chi-square test, or logistic regression models).

The statistical methods have been described in detail in the Biostatistics section of the series. The reader is encouraged to read all the sections to understand these methods. However, the key points to remember are:

• Identify the nature of the outcome for each objective
• Describe the statistical methods separately for each objective
• Identify the methods to handle confounding and describe them in the statistical methods
• If the researcher is using advanced statistical methods or specific tools, please provide reference to these methods
• Provide the name of the statistical software (including the version) that will be used for data analysis in the present study
• Do not provide a laundry list of all the statistical methods. It just shows that the researcher has not understood the relevance of statistics in the study design.

Multivariate models

In general, multivariate analyses are used in studies and research proposals. These analyses are useful to adjust for confounding (though these are also useful to test for interaction, we shall discuss confounding in this section). For example, we propose to compare two different types of medications in psoriasis. We have used secondary clinical data for this study. The outcome of interest is PASI score. We have collected data on the type of medication, age, sex, and alcohol use. When we compare the PASI score in these two groups, we will use t -test (if linear comparison) or Chi-square test (if PASI is categorized – as described earlier). However, it is possible that age, sex, and alcohol use may also play a role in the clinical progression of psoriasis (which is measured as PASI score). Thus, the researcher would like to account for differences in these variables in the two groups. This can be done using multivariate analytical methods (such as linear regression for continuous variables and logistic regression for categorical dichotomous variables). This is a type of mathematical model in which we include multiple variables: the main explanatory variable (type of drug in this study) and potential confounders (age, sex, and alcohol use in this study). Thus, the outcome (PASI score) after multivariate analyses will be “adjusted” for age, sex, and alcohol use after multivariate analysis. We would like to encourage the readers to consult a statistician for these methods.

TRIVIA: The singular for “data” is “datum,” just as “stratum” is the singular for “strata.” Thus, “ data were analyzed …,” “ data were collected …,” and “ data have been ….”

Clinical Record Forms

We have discussed designing of questionnaires and clinical record forms (CRFs) in detail in two modules. We shall just highlight the most important aspects in this part. The CRF is an important part of the research protocol. The CRF should include all the variables of interest in the study. Thus, it is important to make a list of all parameters of interest before working on the CRF. This can be done by a thorough review of literature and discussion with experts. Once the questionnaire/CRF has been designed, the researcher should pilot it and change according to the feedback from the participants and one's own experience while administering the questionnaire or recording data in the CRF. The CRF should use coded responses (for close-ended questions), this will help in data entry and analysis. If the researcher has developed a scale, the reliability and validity should be tested (methods have been discussed in earlier sections). The CRF can be paper based or computer based (it will depend on the resources).

It is very important to describe the ethics for the present study. It should not be restricted to “ The study will be evaluated by an Institutional Review Committee …” The researcher should demonstrate that s/he has understood the various ethical issues in the present study. The three core principles for ethics are: autonomy (the participants have a right to decide whether to participate in the study or opt out), beneficence/nonmaleficence (the study should not be harmful to participants and the risk–benefit ratio should be adequately understood and described), and justice (all the risks and benefits of the present study should be equally distributed).

The researcher should try to address these issues in the section of “Ethics.” Currently, the National Institutes of Health has proposed the following seven principles of “Ethics in Clinical Research:” social and clinical value, scientific validity, fair subject selection, favorable risk–benefit ratio, independent review, informed consent, and respect for potential and enrolled subjects. The Indian Council of Medical Research has also published guidelines to conduct biomedical research in India. We strongly encourage the readers to be familiar with these guidelines. Furthermore, the researchers should keep themselves updated with changes in these regulations. If it is a clinical trial, the researcher should also be familiar with Schedule Y and Consent form requirements for these types of clinical trials.

Concluding Remarks

This module has been designed as a comprehensive guide for a dermatologist to enable him/her to embark on the exciting journey of designing studies of almost any kind that can be thought to be of relevance to clinical dermatology. There has been a conscious attempt to customize the discussion on design and analysis keeping not only dermatology, but also Indian conditions in mind. However, the module can be of help to any medical doctor embarking on the path to medical research. As contributors, it is our ardent hope that this module might act as a catalyst of good-quality research in the field of dermatology and beyond in India and elsewhere.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Bibliography

Internal Support for Applicants Applying to CIHR Project Grants

Posted 31-Jan-2024

UW CIHR RIF

The University of Waterloo supports and encourages its CIHR scholars in their research pursuits. We know that many proposals to CIHR that are worthy of funding are not successful because of insufficient CIHR funds. We also know that CIHR applications present a significant challenge for researchers, particularly the requirement of pilot data. The University of Waterloo’s CIHR Research Incentive Fund (RIF) is designed to support the improvement of CIHR Project Grant applications and increase the prospect of success for future CIHR Project Grant applications.

RIF awards may be used to generate pilot data, test or develop a research tool, help build collaborative research teams, or other activities that will strengthen the proposal for re-submission to CIHR. Funds may not be transferred to another institution.

All RIF recipients, regardless of funding stream, are required to submit their CIHR Project Grant re-application to the Office of Research by the competition’s internal editorial review deadline. This is to ensure excellent grantscrafting and strengthened applications are being re-submitted to CIHR. Should your application not be submitted for review by the internal editorial review deadline, it will limit your eligibility for future RIF funding. In addition, you are encouraged to seek feedback from other faculty who have experience with CIHR or connect with your Associate Dean, Research, to explore options to enhance the likelihood of success with your CIHR Project Grant application.

As for all research funding, any required certifications (for human participants, animals, biohazards) must be in place before funds are released to the researcher.

The Program offers two funding streams to invited applicants:

Funding Stream 1: Automatic RIF funding If your unsuccessful CIHR Project Grant application was ranked within 5% of the funding rate, you are automatically eligible for $10,000 in bridge funding. You will be contacted directly by the Office of Research and you will be required to submit an electronic cover sheet.

Funding Stream 2: ECR/first time applicant RIF Eligibility If invited by the Office of Research, Early Career Researchers or first time applicants to CIHR Project Grants may apply for a RIF if their recent CIHR Project Grant application was unsuccessful and does not align with  Stream 1 .  Please see the sections on “Eligibility” and “Application Package” below for how to apply. RIF awards of up to $20,000 are provided upon favourable recommendation by a review committee, dependent upon available funds.

Eligibility

• Must be tenured or tenure-track, full-time Waterloo faculty, or hold a definite term research professor appointment, where the primary affiliation is with University of Waterloo.
• Must be a Nominated Principal Investigator on an unsuccessful CIHR Project Grant submitted through University of Waterloo.
• Must be willing to commit to resubmitting to CIHR within 2 years of receiving the RIF award.
• Stream 2 applicants must have been an Early Career Researcher (ECR) as defined by CIHR , or a first-time applicant to CIHR Project Grants (for any project) at the time of the original CIHR application. Individuals who have been the NPA on a successful Project Grant through the University of Waterloo or another institution are not eligible to receive a Stream 2 RIF.
• Individuals are not eligible to hold more than one Stream 2 RIF for the same project. Early Career Researchers who have previously received RIF funds are not eligible to receive a Stream 2 RIF.
• RIF holders are eligible for the new Acceleration program.

Application process

For  Funding Stream 2 , submit the following as  a single PDF file  (except for the Office of Research cover sheet) to  [email protected]  on or before the application deadline:

• CIHR rating and ranking document
• CIHR Reviewer Comments and Scientific Officer Notes (if applicable) 1
• A plan to strengthen the application (up to 2 pages) that describes how the CIHR reviewer comments will be addressed, clearly indicating which proposed activities will require RIF funds, and how those funds will be used, along with other actions to address weaknesses. The link between the proposed budget and addressing reviewer comments should be clear.
• Budget for up to $20,000 that includes an explanation of what the requested funds will be used for and how this supports the plan to address reviewer comments (up to 1 page). In cases where the plan to strengthen the CIHR Project Grant application will incorporate additional funds beyond the RIF award, specify what part(s) of the plan the RIF funds will directly support
• For ECRs, if applicable. Previous RIF differentiation statement: if you have received a CIHR RIF award in the past, describe (up to ½ page) how your current unsuccessful CIHR proposal significantly differs from the one that you previously received a RIF award for to support re-submission to CIHR
• approved by your academic unit and Faculty , must be available on the electronic cover sheet system.

Review Process

Applications for  Funding Stream 2   will be reviewed by a qualified review committee. Applications will be reviewed according to the following factors:

• Rating and ranking from the CIHR competition 
• Overall strength of the CIHR project grant application with respect to its ‘fundability’ 
• Reviewer comments, Scientific Officer notes (if applicable)
• Quality and feasibility of the plan to respond to the reviews and improve the application, including how RIF funds will be used to strengthen the CIHR proposal.

Annual RIF Competition Deadlines

~August/September annually - to coincide with funding results of Spring Project Grant competitions.

~March/April annually - To coincide with funding results of Fall Project Grant competitions.

For more information:

Reach out to the CIHR team at [email protected]

UW CIHR External Review (UCER) Program

The Office of Research will arrange and cover the cost of up to three external reviews of any University of Waterloo-led CIHR Project Grant applications who meet all program deadlines outlined below.

This is an excellent opportunity to receive important feedback from experts in your field to ensure the competitiveness of the application. We strongly encourage Project Grant applicants to take advantage of this resource.

To be eligible, the Nominated Principal Applicant must

• be tenured or tenure-track, full-time Waterloo faculty, or hold a definite term research professor appointment, where the primary affiliation is with University of Waterloo.
• be an Independent Researcher as defined by CIHR .
• meet all program deadlines. Failure to meet any of the program deadlines will result in the application being removed from this round of external review.
• Participants in the new Acceleration program are not eligible for the UCER program.
• ~2.5 months before CIHR application deadline - NPA emails the name, email, and phone number of between 3-5 suggested reviewers (do NOT suggest any that will be included in the application).
• This should be a fulsome application package with as many of the final components as possible (e.g. summary, lay summary, summary of progress, proposal, CV)
• ~1 month before CIHR application deadline - External reviewer deadline to provide their feedback.

Anticipated Program Deadlines

For NPAs submitting to the Fall 2024 CIHR Project Grant competition

• June 27, 2024 - NPA emails the name, email, and phone number of between 3-5 suggested reviewers (do NOT suggest any that will be included in the application).
• July 11, 2024 - NPA submits the application package for external review.
• August 11, 2024 - External reviewer deadline to provide their feedback.
• September 5, 2024 by 9am - NPA submits full application by internal deadline

UW CIHR Top Applicant Acceleration Program - Pilot

The Acceleration Program is a by-invitation pilot where an expert panel will provide in-person scientific merit review to top applicants who were unsuccessful in a CIHR Project Grant competition. The purpose of the program is to further enhance the quality of unsuccessful but well-rated proposals and prepare them for resubmission to the CIHR Project Grant scheme in a following round.

Review panels will consist of three to seven members with differing expertise to ensure critical components/aspects of proposals are well covered. This includes scientific/technical merits and fit to the research pillar. It may also include panelists with expertise in areas including, but not limited to:

• Knowledge mobilization/translation
• Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Research Practice
• Sex and Gender Based Analysis
• Indigenous Research.

This is a by-invitation only program. To be considered for the Acceleration Program:

• The original CIHR Project Grant application must be rated 4.0 or higher and the percent rank within the committee must be 50% or higher*
• Acceleration participants must be willing to wait for the panel session before resubmitting to CIHR. Given the short turnaround between receiving a Notice of Decision and the next competition deadline, this inevitably means the unsuccessful applicants to a Spring Project Grant competition would not resubmit until the following Spring and unsuccessful applications to a Fall competition would not resubmit until the following Fall.
• Acceleration participants must be willing to provide a copy of the draft application for the panelists to review in advance of the session.
• Acceleration participants must be willing to commit to resubmitting to CIHR within two CIHR Project grant cycles of participating in the Acceleration program.

*Depending on the number of selected applications, the percent rank cutoff may vary.

Selection process

Decisions on selection will be made by the Associate Vice President, Health Initiatives on the recommendation of the Director and the Senior Manager, Funding Agencies and Non-Profit Sponsors (FANS). Potential participants will be approached directly.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to "About this site"
• Departments

Language selection

• Search and menus

How CIHR funds research

Chapter 1: Intro

As the Government of Canada's health research investment agency, CIHR gets to support amazing science and health-related projects across the country.

With CIHR funding, researchers can study a problem, test an idea and find answers that will, in time, lead to new and improved health treatments, practices and policies to keep Canadians safe and healthy.

Chapter 2: Funding breakdown

At CIHR, we invest more than 90% of our budget directly into health research activities.

With an annual budget of just over $1B, and often in collaboration with partners across sectors, we run over one hundred funding competitions that attract thousands of applications from talented researchers across Canada each year.

Chapter 3: Peer review

So how does it all work?

Researchers submit their applications to CIHR online, so that each application can be reviewed by an independent panel of experts.

These experts are all volunteers who are responsible for assessing and scoring each application as part of a process called peer review .

This process helps ensure that CIHR’s funding decisions are fair, transparent, and free from any conflict of interest.

When the peer review process is complete for each funding competition, the researchers who submitted the top-rated applications receive grants to support their studies and projects.

All funding results are posted on CIHR’s website.

Chapter 4: Conclusion

Canada is home to some of the world’s top scientists and health researchers and their work is contributing to a stronger and healthier future for all.

Visit our funding page to learn more.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to "About this site"
• Departments

Language selection

• Search and menus

Operating Grant: National Women’s Health Research Initiative (NWHRI): Innovation Fund Frequently Asked Questions

The total amount available for this funding opportunity is $9,000,000, enough to fund approximately fifteen (15) grants:

• $3,000,000 is available to fund up to five (5) projects relevant to the translational research funding pool;
• $6,000,000 is available to fund up to ten (10) projects relevant to the healthcare implementation research funding pool.

Applications relevant to each pool will be funded top down in order of percent rank within their pool. If a pool is undersubscribed or lacks fundable applications, the remaining unfunded applications that are deemed fundable will be pooled together and funded in rank order as far as funds will allow.

CIHR wishes to fund as many grants as possible, so please request only the amount that you require to carry out your proposed activities.

Should CIHR or partner(s) funding levels not be available or are decreased due to unforeseen circumstances, CIHR and partner(s) reserve the right to reduce, defer or suspend financial contributions to grants received as a result of this funding opportunity.

Please note the following definitions for trainee and independent researcher as included on the CIHR Glossary of Funding-related terms webpage. Typically, a postdoctoral fellow is considered a trainee.

trainee (stagiaire)

• an individual who is enhancing their research skills through actual involvement in research and who works under the formal supervision of an independent researcher ; or

For example:

• an undergraduate student engaged in research at an academic institution ;
• a graduate student enrolled in a graduate course of study at an academic institution ;
• a postdoctoral fellow (post-PhD) at a academic or research institution;
• a post-health professional degree fellow (e.g., nursing, physiotherapy, medicine, dentistry) at an academic or research institution.

The list of examples is not exhaustive. Applicants are encouraged to communicate with CIHR .

independent researcher (chercheur indépendant)

An individual who:

• is autonomous regarding their research activities; and
• must commence by the effective date of funding; and
• allows the individual to pursue the proposed research project, to engage in independent research activities for the entire duration of the funding, to supervise trainees (if applicable, as per their institution’s policy), and to publish the research results; and
• obliges the individual to conform to institutional regulations concerning the conduct of research, the supervision of trainees, and the employment conditions of staff paid with CIHR funding.
• Depending on the funding opportunity, an individual who does not meet the criterion of independence at the time of application may still be endorsed in the nominated principal applicant role, provided an official letter from the administering institution is included in the application confirming that the individual's independent appointment/position will commence by the funding start date. Refer to the relevant funding opportunity for possible restrictions.
• the research proposal covers only areas of investigation for which they are an independent researcher and not areas of study in which they are a trainee; and
• In such cases, the individual must attach a description of their area of study as a trainee to their application

An individual or Canadian non-governmental organization (that is submitting an application as a nominated principal applicant (NPA)) cannot submit more than one application as an NPA. However, one university can be an Institution Paid for as many applications as needed.

In ResearchNet, the Summary of Research Proposal has a limit of 3,500 characters (including spaces) or approximately up to max one page. Please follow these specific steps to add your summary of research proposal into ResearchNet: prepare your summary in a Word Document outside of ResearchNet ensuring that the document follows CIHR’s Acceptable Application Formats and PDF attachments guidelines , and that the text does not exceed one page; copy-paste the text into ResearchNet Summary of Research Proposal task once final; click Preview PDF Summary and verify that you can view the full text in the one-page PDF document that gets generated, and then click Save. This task will then be marked as complete and you will be brought back to the list of other tasks that are to be completed. Should you need to make any changes to your summary after that, please delete the summary contained in the Summary of Research Proposal and then copy the updated version of the summary from your Word Document and paste it into ResearchNet Summary of Research Proposal task; then Preview PDF and click Save. Resume completion of other tasks for your application for this funding opportunity.

At the registration phase, the Enter Budget Information task collects information on your estimated budget. Indicate your average yearly estimated budget for your project in the field Total Amount Requested from CIHR ($) Year 1. No budget justification is required at this stage. You may change your budget request at the Application stage.

At the Application stage, provide a detailed budget justification in relation to planned activities and clearly justify all budget items.

You can find the Tri-Agency Harmonized CV on the CIHR website. Please note that recently the cm and inches measurements were updated on the acceptable format page on CIHR's website and the templates are in the process of being updated. If the template you access is not following CIHR’s acceptable format, the margins can manually be changed to 2cm or 0.79 inches.

You can also find the frequently asked questions .

As part of its mission, CIHR seeks to foster effective Canadian involvement in international health research that benefits Canadians and the global community (please see International and global health collaborations ). Please note that the purpose of this funding opportunity is “to fund innovative applied health research to address implementation gaps and progress interventions towards real-world impact that improves access to health care and ultimately improves health outcomes for women, girls, and gender diverse people across Canada.” In addition, the funded projects “will be expected to link with the Pan-Canadian Women's Health Coalition during and at the end of their project to identify and facilitate translational opportunities for their research, as applicable.”

For the ease of access, we are including here the objectives the Pan-Canadian Women's Health Coalition – Hubs , which are to:

• Mobilize and scale-up newly generated and existing knowledge and models of care into effective, gender-sensitive, and culturally appropriate women's health and wellness services across Canada.
• Maximize research impact within and beyond the Coalition to help ensure evidence is integrated into health policy, decision making, and planning to support community, regional, provincial, territorial, and /or federal efforts regarding women's health.
• Build capacity for the next generation of women's health researchers through training and mentorship opportunities embedded within the hub to support the development of a sustainable women's health research ecosystem in Canada.
• Engage in community-based priority setting activities and identify future critical areas of women's health research based on community, regional and/or national needs.

Therefore, while some parts of the research could take place outside of Canada, the proposal should adequately address how the planned research meets the purpose and objectives of the National Women’s Health Research Initiative: Innovation Fund Funding Opportunity and how it plans to link with the Pan-Canadian Women's Health Coalition while being conducted outside of Canada, to be eligible. Please consult the funding opportunities for the full details on all the eligibility criteria .

Please also remember the following:

• The NPA must have their substantive role in Canada for the duration of the requested grant term.
• The Institution Paid must be authorized to administer CIHR funds before the funding can be released (see Administration of Funds ).

The funds must be administered to a Canadian institution and cannot be administered abroad by CIHR; the primary Institution Paid could transfer portion of granted funds to institutions abroad, as appropriate according to the Tri-agency Guide on Financial Administration (TAGFA) .

If the knowledge user is the Nominated Principal Applicant, they must be affiliated with a Canadian postsecondary institution and/or its affiliated institutions (including hospitals, research institutes and other non-profit organizations with a mandate for health research and/or knowledge translation). Knowledge User in another role on the application may be based outside of Canada.

All participants, including academics, knowledge users, non-academics, Indigenous organizations, and international applicants, in a role other than a Collaborator , are required to upload a Tri-Agency harmonized CV. A collaborator is not required to submit a Tri-Agency harmonized CV . The maximum length of CVs is 5 pages in English and 6 pages in French. Any content in excess of the page limit set for the language in which the application is written will be removed without further notice to the Nominated Principal Applicant.

For further details please see Step 2- Application, Task: Identify Participants .

This funding opportunity will support projects relevant to one of the following research areas:

• Translational research focused on expediting the development and adoption of new healthcare diagnostics, therapeutics, and medical devices for the benefit of women, girls, and gender-diverse people within the healthcare system.
• Healthcare implementation research focused on scaling up promising practices for removing barriers and improving access to healthcare for women, girls, and gender-diverse people.

More specifically, the translational research stream focuses on research that moves info from bench to bedside, meaning translating existing knowledge from basic science, previous studies, clinical trials, etc. into new, more efficient/effective treatments, diagnostics, therapeutics and medical devices.

It is the responsibility of the applicants in their application package to appropriately describe how their proposed work will do this and to convince the reviewers that the proposed study fits the requirements and objectives of the funding opportunity.

Applicants are not expected to be linked to an existing National Women’s Health Research Initiative Pan-Canadian Women’s Health Coalition Hubs at the time of application. However, applicants should outline in their proposals how they plan to link and work with Pan-Canadian Women’s Health Coalition . All funded research projects will be required to link with The Coalition in order to identify emerging knowledge mobilization opportunities to support improvements in policy, practice, services, and healthcare for women. This collaborative model helps to ensure that evidence improves women’s care and health outcomes, while also establishing an intersectional approach to research and care to effectively tackle persistent gaps for all women, girls and gender diverse people and inform better policy and decision making.

Once an application has been submitted to CIHR, it is considered under review. As such, the nominated principal applicant and/or members of the applicant team must wait for the notification on the funding decision before submitting the identical or essentially identical application to CIHR, NSERC or SSHRC. Once an application is funded by CIHR, the nominated principal applicant and/or members of the applicant team must not subsequently submit the identical or essentially identical application to CIHR, NSERC or SSHRC, if the start date of funding, as stated in the funding opportunity, is prior to the end date of the active grant. Please see CIHR Guidelines on Identical or Essentially Identical Applications for further details.

Considering that the peer review process timelines will overlap between the current funding opportunity and the Project Grant Spring 2024 competition, identical or essentially identical application can not be submitted to both competitions.

This timeline is a result of an administrative technicality based on CIHR's financial cycle. CIHR's financial year is from April 1 to March 31; a funding start date of June 1, 2024 means that the Nominated Principal Applicants will receive 10 months’ worth amount from June 1, 2024 – March 31, 2025. To provide enough time for applicants to apply and applications to be peer-reviewed, the notice of decision will be sent on August 28, 2024. This does not mean that funded teams will be required to start their projects before their notice of decision; it ensures that funded teams will receive a 10 months’ worth of funding. If the funding start date was in September, the grantees would only receive 7 months' worth of funding for the period of April 1, 2024 - March 31, 2025. The important date for applicants is the notice of decision date, not the funding start date, and please be assured that grantees are not required to start their work before their notice of decision.

We recognize that the term " women's health " is conceptualized and understood in a variety of ways. For the purposes of the National Women's Health Research Initiative, we offer a specific definition for the use of the term women's health. Please note that women’s health need not be in the title of the position that the NPA occupies, rather it is important that the NPA carries out research in the field of women’s health. NPAs are able to specify how they fit this position/mandate criterion in the participant table, the research proposal, as well as relevant sections of the Tri-Agency Harmonized CV . Please note that it is the NPA's responsibility to judge if their work/mandate conforms to the women's health definition. Official eligibility assessment will occur during the review process. 

• Skip to main content
• Skip to "About this site"
• Departments

Language selection

• Search and menus

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Annual Report 2021–22

• Chair’s Message

Providing Stewardship and Accountability

Financial statement discussion and analysis, financial statements, message from the chair of cihr governing council.

Alice Aiken Interim Chair, CIHR Governing Council

On behalf of Governing Council, I am pleased to present the 2021-22 Annual Report of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Government of Canada’s health research investment agency.

This past year, as the COVID-19 pandemic persisted and the virus evolved into new variants of concern, CIHR continued to support the Canadian health research community as it conducted exceptional research and informed Canada’s response. As a result of these efforts, we were able to develop made-in-Canada, evidence-based solutions to the many challenges that Canadians faced during this pandemic, while also contributing to the global research effort.

Despite the challenges of the pandemic, the agency also remained focused on implementing the CIHR Strategic Plan 2021–2031: A Vision for a Healthier Future and its five priority areas:

• Advance research excellence in all its diversity;
• Strengthen Canadian health research capacity;
• Accelerate the self-determination of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples in health research;
• Pursue health equity through research; and,
• Integrate evidence in health decisions.

To ensure that the agency was well-positioned to deliver on these priorities, CIHR’s leadership team re-evaluated its organizational structure. A new Learning Health Systems portfolio was subsequently created, to help deliver on CIHR’s knowledge mobilization mandate as expressed in the CIHR Act . The goal of this new portfolio is to translate research into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products, and a strengthened health care system.

Advance research excellence in all its diversity

As part of the agency’s efforts to advance research excellence and promote open science, CIHR introduced a guide to help researchers adhere to international best practices related to the prompt reporting of clinical trials results.

This past year also saw the continuation of strong collaborations – both abroad and at home – to support research excellence. For example, CIHR continued its longstanding partnership with the European Commission with the announcement of joint transnational collaboration on neurodegenerative diseases, rare diseases, and antimicrobial resistance, among other topics. At home, CIHR worked with its tri-agency partners – the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) – as well as with the Canada Research Coordinating Committee (CRCC) to further coordinate efforts, such as:

• Releasing the 2021 Tri-Agency Framework for Responsible Conduct of Research to promote and protect the quality, accuracy, and reliability of research funded by the three federal research granting agencies;
• Launching Stage 1 of the Canadian Biomedical Research Fund and Biosciences Research Infrastructure Fund as part of Canada’s Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy;
• Releasing the first progress report on the implementation of the interagency strategic plan, Setting new directions to support Indigenous research and research training in Canada ; and
• Announcing the SMART Healthy Cities Training Platform, which will develop an interdisciplinary, inter-sectoral training initiative that will generate cutting-edge knowledge and build capacity for implementation science and solutions-based research.

Strengthen Canadian health research capacity

Significant progress was also made on strengthening Canadian health research capacity, with a focus on promoting an equitable, diverse, and inclusive health research ecosystem that values the perspectives and contributions of all. As part of these efforts, the agency hosted virtual engagement sessions to facilitate open and productive conversations on the actions that CIHR can take to address systemic racism in the health research funding system. As well, the agency created the CIHR Anti-Racism External Advisory Committee and the CIHR External Advisory Committee on Accessibility and Systemic Ableism, to inform the development of CIHR’s anti-racism action plan and accessibility action plan, respectively.

CIHR continued to support the next generation of health researchers with an investment of $31.1 million over six years through the Health Research Training Platform (HRTP). Comprised of 13 unique training programs, the HRTP brings together researchers from hospitals and universities to increase Canada’s capacity to conduct research on specific disease areas and health challenges. This program, as well as CIHR’s other capacity development programs (including the Health System Impact Fellowship), will prepare the next generation of researchers to respond to a broad range of current and future needs.

CIHR’s priority to strengthen Canadian health research capacity also includes a commitment to enhancing CIHR’s rapid response capacity. As part of the continued response to the pandemic, CIHR launched various funding opportunities focused on COVID-19 to study the virus as well as the broader impacts of the pandemic, including impacts on equity-seeking communities, and children, youth, and families.

The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us many lessons, including the importance of enhancing our resiliency to future pandemics and health emergencies. In response, CIHR announced the creation of the Centre for Research on Pandemic Preparedness and Health Emergencies, with an ongoing investment of $18.5 million per year. The Research Centre is dedicated to growing Canada’s capacity to create and mobilize knowledge to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from existing and future pandemics and public health emergencies.

Accelerate the Self-Determination of Indigenous Peoples in Health Research

CIHR continues to advance its Action Plan: Building a healthier future for First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples , which commits to a series of concrete actions to further strengthen Indigenous health research in Canada. As part of these efforts, CIHR continues to work closely with Indigenous communities to build capacity for research and knowledge mobilization. Over the past year, this included the launch of Indigenous strategic funding opportunities, including research related to Indigenous COVID-19 rapid research, the wider health impacts of COVID-19, and the third phase of the Indigenous Gender and Wellness Initiative. CIHR is also advancing distinctions-based engagements and initiatives through directed grants co-developed with Indigenous organizations that are tailored to address Indigenous health issues, including the First Nations Biobanking and Genomic Research Initiative and the Inuit Research Network.

Pursue health equity through research

The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the interconnection between the health of Canadians and the health of people around the world, as the health threats that we face today are increasingly transnational in nature. In May 2021, CIHR released Global Health 3.0: CIHR’s Framework for Action on Global Health Research , which articulates CIHR’s new vision for global health research in Canada. Since the release of the Framework, CIHR has launched funding opportunities to support its implementation, including the Women Rise Initiative. A partnership with SSHRC and the International Development Research Centre, the initiative will support women’s health and economic empowerment for a COVID-19 recovery that is inclusive, sustainable, and equitable.

Integrate evidence in health decisions

CIHR continued to collaborate with federal colleagues to advance the evidence-based policy agenda of the Government of Canada. A key collaboration included CIHR’s involvement in the development of Canada’s Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy, through the Budget 2021 investment of $250 million over three years in the Clinical Trials Fund.

CIHR also continued to support research and knowledge mobilization activities that advance key Government of Canada priorities. For example, this past year CIHR launched funding opportunities to inform the development of national standards for delivering mental health and substance use services, as well as to advance the priorities outlined in the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada’s annual report for 2021. CIHR also supported colleagues in accessing the best available evidence through its Best Brains Exchanges program, including a session on the future of public health in Canada, as well as a session on surveillance and research needs to inform public health action aimed at preventing and managing the impacts of post-COVID-19 condition.

Through Canada’s Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), CIHR also continued to support activities that integrate the voices of patients in research and health care. For example, the newly launched SPOR National Training Entity will focus on enhancing the ways that the science of patient-oriented research is taught and conducted in Canada.

I invite you to read the financial details of this report to learn more about the investments that are allowing CIHR to support new scientific knowledge and enable its translation into improved health and a strengthened Canadian health care system.

CIHR Governing Council

CIHR reports to Parliament through the Minister of Health. Its Governing Council comprises a group of up to 18 distinguished Canadians who together provide oversight and strategic direction for the organization and evaluate its overall performance.

Jeannie Shoveller Chair (until December 31, 2022) Vice President, Research & Innovation, IWK Health Centre Professor, Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University

Debbie Fischer Executive-in-Residence, Rotman School of Management Executive Associate, KPMG

Louise Lemieux-Charles (until May 23, 2021) Professor Emeritus, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation Dalla Lana School of Public Health University of Toronto

Alice B. Aiken Interim Chair (as of January 1, 2022) Vice-Chair (until December 31, 2021) Vice President (Research & Innovation) Dalhousie University

Dominic Giroux President and CEO, Health Sciences North and the Health Sciences North Research Institute

Stephen Lucas (Ex-officio, non-voting member) Deputy Minister Health Canada

Paul Allison (until May 23, 2021) Faculty of Dentistry McGill University

Diane Gosselin (until May 23, 2021) President and Chief Executive Officer, CQDM

Amélie Quesnel-Vallée Professor, Departments of Sociology & Epidemiology McGill University

Brenda Andrews University Professor, Donnelly Centre for Cellular and Biomolecular Research Department of Molecular Genetics University of Toronto

Nada Jabado Senior Scientist, RI‑MUHC Glen site Child Health and Human Development Program

Michael Salter Interim Vice-Chair (since January 1, 2022) Senior Scientist, Neurosciences & Mental Health and Chief of Research Emeritus The Hospital for Sick Children

Deborah DeLancey (as of July 1, 2021) Former Deputy Minister with the Government of the Northwest Territories

Shanthi Johnson (as of July 1, 2021) Professor and Dean School of Public Health, University of Alberta

Michael Strong (Ex-officio, non-voting member) President, CIHR

Mark S. Dockstator Associate Professor, Trent University Chanie Wenjack School of Indigenous Studies

Brianne Kent Assistant Professor, Simon Fraser University

Marcello Tonelli Senior Associate Dean (Health Research), Cumming School of Medicine Associate Vice President (Health Research), University of Calgary

Don Ferguson Former Deputy Minister of Health for New Brunswick

Josette-Renée Landry CEO, Institut du Savoir and Vice-President, Research and Education at Montfort Hospital

Introduction

The following Financial Statement Discussion and Analysis (FSD&A) should be read in conjunction with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) audited financial statements and accompanying notes for the year ended March 31, 2022.

The responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the FSD&A rests with the management of CIHR. The purpose of the FSD&A is to highlight information and provide explanations to enhance the user’s understanding of CIHR’s financial position and results of operations, while demonstrating CIHR’s accountability for its resources. Additional information on CIHR’s performance is available in the CIHR Departmental Results Report , and information on its plans and priorities is available in the CIHR Department Plan .

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research was established in June 2000 under the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Act . It is listed in Schedule II to the Financial Administration Act as a departmental corporation. CIHR’s objective is to excel, according to international standards of scientific excellence, in the creation of new knowledge, and its translation into improved health, more effective health services and products, and a strengthened Canadian health care system.

CIHR’s budget is allocated through authorities approved by Parliament. CIHR has separate voted authorities for operating expenses and for grants/awards. Authorities provided to CIHR by Parliament do not parallel financial reporting according to Canadian public sector accounting standards, since authorities are primarily based on cash accounting principles. Consequently, items recognized in the Statement of Financial Position, the Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position, the Statement of Change in Departmental Net Debt, and the Statement of Cash Flows are not necessarily the same as those provided through authorities from Parliament. Note 3 of the Financial Statements provides users with a reconciliation between the two bases of reporting.

CIHR’s financial results in 2021-22 are consistent with those of the preceding fiscal year, taking into account the increase in parliamentary authorities available last fiscal year to support COVID-19 health research.

1. Statement of Financial Position

The decrease in total liabilities of $0.7 million is primarily due to a decrease ($0.3 million) in the amount accrued for outstanding invoices to external vendors at year-end, as well as a decrease ($0.3 million) in payables due to other government departments. CIHR resumed the payout of excess compensatory leave in 2021-22 thereby reducing the accrual required for compensatory leave ($0.2 million). There was a decrease ($0.3 million) in the vacation accrual as more vacation was used in 2021-22 compared to 2020-21. This was offset by an increase of $0.4 million for the accrued salaries and wages.

The balance in total financial and non-financial assets decreased by $1.5 million due to a decrease ($1.3 million) in the net tangible capital assets. The acquisition of capital assets has decreased largely due to CIHR moving to a new office building in June 2024 and having to decommission its current data center. Most systems will be moved to the cloud requiring no further capital investment except for a few systems which will be moved to SSC’s Facility as a Service (FaaS) where a large capital investment will be required in 2023-24. There was also a decrease ($0.2 million) in the amount due from the consolidated revenue fund.

2. Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position

The decrease in both total expenses (7.9%) and in net cost of operations before government funding and transfers (8.0%) are mainly attributable to the decrease ($231.3 million) in Parliamentary authorities provided to CIHR by the Government of Canada from the prior fiscal year. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in COVID-19 funding CIHR received and distributed during the year.

3. Variance Analysis

3.1 variances between current year actual results and budget.

CIHR’s 2021-22 year-end Parliamentary authorities of $1,392.9 million represents a decrease of $231.3 million (or 14.2%) compared to CIHR’s 2020-21 year-end authorities ($1,624.2 million).

This decrease is a key factor to note when comparing current year and prior year results for CIHR. The main reason for the current year decrease is due to a decrease in grant funding to support COVID-19 research.

3.2 Variances between current year actual results and prior year actual results

Grants and awards expenses decreased by 8.7% (or $125.6 million) in 2021-22 due to decreased Parliamentary authorities provided to CIHR to support grant funding (as outlined in section 3.1). Total operating expenses also increased by 6.8% ($5.0 million) over the previous year. This increase is mainly due to an increase of $3.6 million in salaries and employment benefits as a result of a 1.5% economic increase, as well as an increase of 41 FTEs compared to 2020-21. This increase results from the implementation of positions secured through the Federal Budget 2021, as well as the reinvestment of travel savings resulting from travel restrictions into temporary operational capacity and support to COVID-19 related funding opportunities.

In addition, there was an increase of $1.2 million for professional services expenditures related to a number of non-recurring contracts that were specific to fiscal year 2021-22. Finally, CIHR’s cost of accommodation for its current office space increased by $0.2 million, while the remaining categories experienced immaterial fluctuations compared to the prior year.

4. Trend Analysis

4.1 grants and awards expenses (in millions of dollars).

• The proportion of grants and awards expenses in relation to changes in the Parliamentary authorities fluctuate minimally from year to year.
• In 2021-22, grants and awards expenses made up 94.4% of total expenses, as compared to 95.2% in 2020-21.

4.2. Operating Expenses (in millions of dollars)

• The ratio of operating expenses to total expenses was 5.6% in 2021-22, as compared to 4.8% in 2020-21.
• Salary and employee benefit expenses increased by $3.6 million (or 5.4%) in 2021-22, as discussed in 3.2.
• In 2021-22, salaries and employee benefits made up 85.0% of total operating expenses, as compared to 85.9% in the prior year.

Financial Outlook – 2022-23

CIHR continues to be driven by Government of Canada priorities, and maintains its support to the research community in 2022-23. CIHR’s commitment to raise investments for graduate students and improve equity, diversity and inclusion in the research system remain essential goals for the Agency.

Budget 2022 announced new funding for CIHR related to COVID-19, Black researchers, and dementia and brain health research.

In order to continue COVID-19 research and further understand its lasting impacts, Budget 2022 announced $20 million to CIHR over five years, starting in 2022-23, to support additional research on the long-term effects of COVID-19 infections on Canadians, as well as the wider impacts on health and health care systems.

CIHR is committed to improve equity, diversity and inclusion in the research system, therefore, together with SSHRC and NSERC, the Tri-Agency has prioritized increasing opportunities for Black researchers. To support this, Budget 2022 announced $15 million to CIHR over five years, starting in 2022-23, and $4 million ongoing, to support targeted scholarships and fellowships for promising Black student researchers.

It is estimated that one in four Canadian seniors over the age of 85 are diagnosed with dementia. The effects of this disease on both those living with dementia and those caring for them can be devastating. Budget 2022 announced $20 million to CIHR over five years, starting in 2022-23, to increase research in the area of dementia and brain health in order to improve treatment and outcomes for those living with dementia, as well as, to learn more about the mental health consequences for caregivers and evaluate different models of care.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Statement of Management Responsibility Including Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the accompanying financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2022, and all information contained in these financial statements rests with the management of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). These financial statements have been prepared by management using the Government of Canada’s accounting policies, which are based on Canadian public sector accounting standards.

Management is responsible for the integrity and objectivity of the information in these financial statements. Some of the information in the financial statements is based on management's best estimates and judgment, and gives due consideration to materiality. To fulfill its accounting and reporting responsibilities, management maintains a set of accounts that provides a centralized record of CIHR’s financial transactions. Financial information submitted in the preparation of the Public Accounts of Canada, and included in CIHR’s Departmental Results Report , is consistent with these financial statements.

Management is also responsible for maintaining an effective system of internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) designed to provide reasonable assurance that financial information is reliable, that assets are safeguarded and that transactions are properly authorized and recorded in accordance with the Financial Administration Act and other applicable legislation, regulations, authorities and policies.

Management seeks to ensure the objectivity and integrity of data in its financial statements through careful selection, training and development of qualified staff; through organizational arrangements that provide appropriate divisions of responsibility; through communication programs aimed at ensuring that regulations, policies, standards and managerial authorities are understood throughout CIHR; and through conducting an annual risk-based assessment of the effectiveness of the system of ICFR.

The system of ICFR is designed to mitigate risks to a reasonable level based on an ongoing process to identify key risks, to assess effectiveness of associated key controls, and to make any necessary adjustments.

A risk-based assessment of the system of ICFR for the year ended March 31, 2022 was completed in accordance with the Treasury Board Policy on Financial Management and the results and action plans are summarized in the annex Footnote 1 .

The effectiveness and adequacy of CIHR’s system of internal control are reviewed by of internal audit staff, who conduct periodic audits of different areas of CIHR’s operations, and by CIHR’s Audit Committee, which oversees management’s responsibilities for maintaining adequate control systems and the quality of financial reporting, and which recommends the financial statements to the President of CIHR and its Governing Council.

Ernst & Young LLP, the independent auditor for CIHR, has expressed an opinion on the fair presentation of the financial statements of CIHR which does not include an audit opinion on the annual assessment of the effectiveness of CIHR’s internal controls over financial reporting.

Approved by:

Michael J. Strong , MD, FRCPC, FAAN, FCAHS President

Catherine MacLeod Interim Chief Financial Officer

Ottawa, Canada July 13, 2022

Independent auditor’s report

To the Members of the Governing Council of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research

We have audited the financial statements of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [the “Organization”], which comprise the statement of financial position as at March 31, 2022, and the statement of operations and departmental net financial position, statement of change in departmental net debt, and statement of cash flows for the year then ended, and notes to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies.

In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Organization as at March 31, 2022, and its results of operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards.

Basis for opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of our report. We are independent of the Organization in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Canada, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

Responsibilities of management and those charged with governance for the financial statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, management is responsible for assessing the Organization’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless management either intends to liquidate the Organization or to cease operations, or has no realistic alternative but to do so.

Those charged with governance are responsible for overseeing the Organization’s financial reporting process.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

As part of an audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also:

• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.
• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Organization’s internal control.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by management.
• Conclude on the appropriateness of management’s use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Organization’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditor’s report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditor’s report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Organization to cease to continue as a going concern.
• Evaluate the overall presentation, structure, and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation.

We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit.

Ernst & Young LLP Chartered Professional Accountants Licensed Public Accountants

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Statement of Financial Position As at March 31

(in thousands of dollars)

Alice B. Aiken , PhD, MSc, BScPT, BSc Interim Chair, Governing Council

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position For the year ended March 31

Canadian institutes of health research statement of change in departmental net debt for the year ended march 31, canadian institutes of health research statement of cash flows for the year ended march 31, canadian institutes of health research notes to the financial statements as at march 31, 1. authority and objectives.

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) was established in June 2000 under the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Act , replacing the former Medical Research Council of Canada. It is listed in Schedule II to the Financial Administration Act as a departmental corporation.

CIHR’s objective is to excel, according to international standards of scientific excellence, in the creation of new knowledge, and its translation into improved health, more effective health services and products, and a strengthened Canadian health care system. CIHR’s core responsibility is funding health research and training. CIHR is Canada’s health research investment agency. By funding research excellence, CIHR supports the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products and a strengthened Canadian health care system. This is done by providing grants that fund health research and/or provide career and training support to the current and next generation of researchers.

CIHR’s core responsibility is achieved based on three programs:

The first program is Investigator-Initiated Research, which provides funding to conduct research in any area related to health aimed at the discovery and application of knowledge. Funding is provided to researchers and academic organizations to conduct research, translate knowledge, and build capacity through research training and salaries. Applicants identify and propose the nature and scope of the research and compete for support by demonstrating excellence and the potential impact the research will have on health systems and/or health outcomes.

The second program is Training and Career Support, which provides award funding directly to promising current and next generation researchers to support training or career development. Applicants at different career stages compete through a rigorous process and those with the highest potential for promising research careers are funded.

The third program is Research in Priority Areas, which provides funding for targeted grants and awards aimed at addressing priority areas. Priorities are identified by CIHR in consultation with other government departments and agencies, partners and stakeholders. The program mobilizes researchers, patients, health providers, and decision makers to conduct research, enable knowledge translation and build capacity in the priority areas. It often requires collaboration within and across sectors.

CIHR is governed by a Governing Council of up to 18 members appointed by the Governor in Council. There are 16 members, including the Chair, that are voting members and two that are non-voting, ex officio members: the Deputy Minister of Health Canada and the President of CIHR. The Governing Council sets overall strategic direction, goals and policies and oversees programming, ethics, budget and planning.

CIHR has 13 institutes that focus on identifying the research needs and priorities for specific health areas, or for specific populations, then developing strategic initiatives to address those needs. Each institute is led by a Scientific Director who is guided by an Institute Advisory Board, which strives to include representation of the public, researcher communities, research funders, health professionals, health policy specialists and other users of research results.

CIHR’s grants, awards and operating expenditures are funded by budgetary authorities. Employee benefits are funded by statutory authorities.

2. Summary of significant accounting policies

These financial statements are prepared using CIHR’s accounting policies stated below, which are based on Canadian public sector accounting standards. The presentation and results using the stated accounting policies do not result in any significant differences from Canadian public sector accounting standards.

Significant accounting policies are as follows:

Parliamentary authorities

CIHR is financed by the Government of Canada through Parliamentary authorities. Financial reporting of authorities provided to CIHR does not parallel financial reporting according to generally accepted accounting principles since authorities are primarily based on cash flow requirements. Consequently, items recognized in the Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position and in the Statement of Financial Position are not necessarily the same as those provided through authorities from Parliament. Note 3 provides a reconciliation between the bases of reporting. The planned results amounts in the “Expenses” and “Revenues” sections of the Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position are the amounts reported in the Future-oriented Statement of Operations (unaudited) included in the 2022-23 Departmental Plan . Planned results are not presented in the “Government funding and transfers” section of the Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position and in the Statement of Change in Departmental Net Debt because these amounts were not included in the 2022-23 Departmental Plan .

Net cash provided by Government of Canada

CIHR operates within the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF), which is administered by the Receiver General for Canada. All cash received by CIHR is deposited to the CRF and all cash disbursements made by CIHR are paid from the CRF. The net cash provided by Government of Canada is the difference between all cash receipts and all cash disbursements, including transactions between departments of the Government.

Amounts due from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF)

Amounts due from CRF are the result of timing differences at year-end between when a transaction affects authorities and when it is processed through the CRF. Amounts due from the CRF represent the net amount of cash that CIHR is entitled to draw from the CRF without further authorities to discharge its liabilities.

Funds received from external parties for specified purposes are recorded upon receipt as deferred revenue. Revenues are then recognized in the period in which the related expenses are incurred.

Deferred revenue consists of amounts received in advance of the delivery of goods and rendering of services that will be recognized as revenue in a subsequent fiscal year as it is earned.

Other revenues are recognized in the period the event giving rise to the revenues occurred.

Refunds of previous years' expenses

These amounts include the return of grants and awards funds to CIHR in the current fiscal year for expenses incurred in previous fiscal years due to cancellations, refunds of previous years' expenses related to goods or services, and adjustments of previous years' accounts payable. These refunds and adjustments are recorded as revenue in the year received.

Grants and awards (transfer payments) are recorded as an expense in the year the transfer is authorized and all eligibility criteria have been met by the recipient.

Vacation pay and compensatory leave are accrued as the benefits are earned by employees under their respective terms of employment.

Services provided without charge by other government departments for accommodation and employer contributions to the health and dental insurance plans are recorded as operating expenses at their carrying value.

Employee future benefits

• Pension benefits: Eligible employees participate in the Public Service Pension Plan (the Plan), a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan administered by the Government. CIHR’s contributions to the Plan are charged to expenses in the year incurred and represent the total departmental obligation to the Plan. CIHR’s responsibility with regard to the Plan is limited to its contributions. Actuarial surpluses or deficiencies are recognized in the financial statements of the Government of Canada, as the Plan’s sponsor.
• Severance benefits: The accumulation of severance benefits for voluntary departures ceased for CIHR executive and non-represented employees in 2011. The remaining obligation for employees who did not withdraw benefits is calculated on the retained accumulated weeks of severance at their current rate of pay as at March 31.

Accounts receivable

Accounts receivable are initially recorded at cost. When necessary, an allowance for valuation is recorded to reduce the carrying value of accounts receivables to amounts that approximate their net recoverable value.

Tangible capital assets

The costs of acquiring land, buildings, equipment and other capital property are capitalized as tangible capital assets and, except for land, are amortized to expense over the estimated useful lives of the assets. All tangible capital assets having an individual initial cost of $10,000 or more are recorded at their acquisition cost.

Amortization of tangible capital assets is done on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the capital asset as follows:

Assets under construction are not amortized until they become available for use.

Contingent liabilities

Contingent liabilities are potential liabilities that may become actual liabilities when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. If the future event is likely to occur or fail to occur, and a reasonable estimate of the loss can be made, a provision is accrued and an expense recorded to other expenses. If the likelihood is not determinable or an amount cannot be reasonably estimated, the contingency is disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.

Related party transactions

• Services provided on a recovery basis are recognized as revenues and expenses on a gross basis and measured at the exchange amount.
• Certain services received on a without charge basis are recorded for departmental financial statements purposes at the carrying amount.
• Related parties include individuals who are members of key management personnel (KMP) or close family members of those individuals and entities controlled by, or under shared control of, a member of KMP or a close family member of that individual. KMP are individuals having the authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of CIHR. Related party transactions, other than inter-entity transactions, are recorded at the exchange value.

Measurement uncertainty

The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported and disclosed amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes at March 31. The estimates are based on facts and circumstances, historical experience, general economic conditions and reflect CIHR’s best estimate of the related amount at the end of the reporting period. The most significant items where estimates are used are contingent liabilities, the liability for employee future benefits and the useful life of tangible capital assets. Actual results could significantly differ from those estimated. Management’s estimates are reviewed periodically and, as adjustments become necessary, they are recorded in the financial statements in the year they become known.

3. Parliamentary authorities

CIHR receives most of its funding through annual parliamentary authorities. Items recognized in the Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position and the Statement of Financial Position in one year may be funded through parliamentary authorities in prior, current or future years. Accordingly, CIHR has different net results of operations for the year on a government funding basis than on an accrual accounting basis. The differences are reconciled in the following tables:

Reconciliation of net cost of operations to current year authorities used

Authorities provided and used

4. Accounts payable and accrued liabilities

The following table presents details of CIHR's accounts payable and accrued liabilities:

5. Deferred revenue

Deferred revenue represents the balance at year-end of unearned revenues stemming from amounts received from external parties that are restricted in order to fund the expenditures related to specific research projects and stemming from amounts received for fees prior to services being performed. Revenue is recognized in the period in which these expenditures are incurred or in which the service is performed. Details of the transactions related to this account are as follows:

6. Employee future benefits

Pension benefits

CIHR’s employees participate in the Plan, which is sponsored and administered by the Government of Canada. Pension benefits accrue up to a maximum period of 35 years at a rate of 2 percent per year of pensionable service, times the average of the best five consecutive years of earnings. The benefits are integrated with the Canada/Québec Pension Plans benefits and they are indexed to inflation.

Both the employees and CIHR contribute to the cost of the Plan. Due to the amendment of the Public Service Superannuation Act following the implementation of provisions related to Economic Action Plan 2012 , employee contributors have been divided into two groups – Group 1 relates to existing plan members as of December 31, 2012 and Group 2 relates to members joining the Plan as of January 1, 2013. Each group has a distinct contribution rate.

The 2021-22 employer contributions amount to $5,152 ($4,987 in 2020-21). For Group 1 members, the expense represents approximately 1.01 times (1.01 times in 2020-21) the employee contributions and, for Group 2 members, approximately 1.00 times (1.00 times in 2020-21) the employee contributions.

CIHR’s responsibility with regard to the Plan is limited to its contributions. Actuarial surpluses or deficiencies are recognized in the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Government of Canada, as the Plan’s sponsor.

Severance benefits

Severance benefits provided to CIHR’s employees were previously based on an employee’s eligibility, years of service and salary at termination of employment. However, since 2011, the accumulation of severance benefits for voluntary departures progressively ceased for substantially all employees. Employees subject to these changes were given the option to be paid the full or partial value of benefits earned to date or collect the full or remaining value of benefits upon departure from the public service. By March 31, 2022, all settlements for immediate cash-out were completed. Severance benefits are unfunded and, consequently, the outstanding obligation will be paid from future authorities.

The changes in the obligations during the year were as follows:

7. Accounts receivable

The following table presents details of CIHR's accounts receivable balances:

CIHR has no allowance for doubtful accounts on receivables from all sources.

8. Tangible capital assets

9. contractual obligations.

The nature of CIHR’s programs may result in large multi-year contracts and obligations whereby CIHR will be obligated to make future payments in order to carry out its grants and awards payment programs or when the services/goods are received. Significant contractual obligations that can be reasonably estimated are summarized as follows:

10. Contingent liabilities

CIHR may be subject to claims and litigation in the normal course of business. Management has not identified any claims with a material impact on the financial statements and, consequently, no provision has been made.

11. Related party transactions

Common services provided without charge by other government departments

During the year, CIHR received services without charge from certain common service organizations related to accommodation and the employer’s contribution to the health and dental insurance plans. These services provided without charge are recorded at the carrying value in CIHR’s Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position as follows:

The Government has centralized some of its administrative activities for efficiency, cost-effectiveness purposes and economic delivery of programs to the public. As a result, the Government uses central agencies and common service organizations so that one department performs services for all other departments and agencies without charge. The costs of these services, such as the payroll and cheque issuance services provided by Public Services and Procurement Canada, are not included in CIHR’s Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position.

Administration of programs on behalf of other government departments

Under a memorandum of understanding signed with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), CIHR administers funds for the Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship and Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship programs. During the year, CIHR incurred expenses of $23,750 ($24,890 in 2020-21) for grants and awards on behalf of NSERC and SSHRC. These expenses are reflected in the financial statements of NSERC and SSHRC and are not recorded in these financial statements.

12. Segmented information

Presentation by segment is based on CIHR’s core responsibilities. The presentation by segment is based on the same accounting policies as described in the Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in note 2. The following table presents the expenses incurred and revenues generated for the main core responsibilities, by major object of expense and by major type of revenue. The segment results for the period are as follows:

13. Comparative information

Certain comparative figures have been reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.