Resources

NIH Public Access Policy

The NIH Public Access Policy ensures that the public has access to the published results of NIH-funded research. It requires scientists to submit final peer-reviewed journal manuscripts that arise from NIH funds to the digital archive PubMed Central. The policy requires that these final peer-reviewed manuscripts be accessible to the public on PubMed Central to help advance science and improve human health.

It is imperative that any peer-reviewed published manuscript acknowledge Frontiers funding, whether using a service or resource, or receipt of funding. The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCTAS) will withhold Frontiers funding for any non-compliant manuscripts. Manuscripts are non-compliant 3 months after original publication date.

Learn more here: website and in our step-by-step guide

Retroactively Citing a Grant in Publications

As stated in Frontiers Official Notice of Awards: Each publication, press release, or other document about research supported by an NIH award must include an acknowledgment of NIH award support and a disclaimer. Prior to issuing a press release concerning the outcome of this research, please notify the NIH awarding IC in advance to allow for coordination.

The process is simple. The corresponding author simply requests this change typically to the Editor in Chief. For Journal Title the Editor in Chief is NAME and EMAIL.

Note: Full citation language

UL1: “Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number UL1TR002366. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health”.

KL2: “Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number KL2TR002367. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.”

TL1: “Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number TL1TR002368. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.”

Clinical Trials.gov Registration and Updating

On October 1, 2021, the NIH implemented compliance validations to prevent Research Performance Progress Reports from being submitted if the recipient is delinquent in submission of Clinical Trials (CT) results reporting. This would directly impact future Frontiers Notice of Award.

The Frontiers Awardee for an applicable clinical trial must register their trial on CT.gov immediately after IRB approval during the Prior Approval process. Applicant must report each milestone accomplished to stay compliant.

Reporting on CT.gov:

• Meets ethical obligations to research participants
• Informs future research and research funding decisions
• Mitigates information bias
• Allows the evaluation of research integrity
• Prevents duplication of trials of unsafe or ineffective interventions
• Provides access to data to support evidence-based medicine
• Enhances patient access to enroll in clinical trials

Learn more here: website

NIH Common Forms for Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending Support

Common Forms for Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending (Other) Support, or Common Forms, represent a collaborative effort between federal research agencies to ensure standard disclosure requirements as outlined in the National Security Presidential Memorandum – 33 (NSPM-33). Common Forms will create greater standardization across federal agencies and provide clarity regarding disclosure requirements.

Learn more here: website.

A biographical sketch (also referred to as biosketch) documents an individual's qualifications and experience for a specific role in a project.

Other Support (OS) is sometimes referred to as “current and pending support” or “active and pending support.” OS includes all resources made available to a researcher in support of and/or related to all of their research endeavors, regardless of whether or not they have monetary value and regardless of whether they are based at the institution the researcher identifies for the current grant.

All senior/key personnel included in funding proposals and Research Performance Progress Reports (RPPRs) with due dates on or after January 25, 2026, must:

1. Register with Open Researcher and Contributor Identification (ORCiD)
2. Link ORCiD account to eRA Commons Personal Profile
3. Provide Common Forms Biographical Sketches and Other Support documents produced and digitally certified using Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae (SciENcv)

What is ORCiD?

• A global, non-profit organization providing a registry of researchers
• Professional information is stored and managed in the ORCiD record
• Assigns a Persistent Identifier (PID) known as ORCiD ID that connects researchers with their contributions to science over time and across changes of name, location, and institutional affiliation.

Learn more here: website.

What is SciENcv?

• Application in My NCBI offered by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
• Links with researcher’s eRA Commons Personal Profile and ORCID record

Learn more here: website.

NIH Simplified Review Criteria

NIH is implementing a simplified framework for the peer review of the majority of competing research project grant (RPG) applications, beginning with submissions with due dates of January 25, 2025. The simplified peer review framework aims to better facilitate the mission of scientific peer review – identification of the strongest, highest-impact research by:

1. Enabling peer reviewers to better focus on answering the key questions necessary to assess the scientific and technical merit of proposed research projects:

• Should the proposed research project be conducted?
• Can the proposed research project be conducted?

2. Mitigating the effect of reputational bias by refocusing the evaluation of investigator/environment to within the context of the proposed research.
3. Reducing reviewer burden by shifting policy compliance activities to NIH staff.

Learn about the simplified review framework.

Cite Frontiers.