Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42313819›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2026

Ten simple rules for turning your qualifying exam into an NIH-style fellowship proposal: A guide for graduate students.

Courtney Peña-Lima, Cameron S Bader, Brendan K Ball, Troy C Dildine, Mekhala V Dissanayake, Iris van 't Erve, Albina Ibrayeva, Amy Nippert, M K Quinn, Chelse Spinner and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Courtney Peña-LimaBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7381-7789
Cameron S BaderBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3544-0113
Brendan K BallBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-519X
Troy C DildineBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0892-7527
Mekhala V DissanayakeBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Iris van 't ErveBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3667-9185
Albina IbrayevaBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Amy NippertBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
M K QuinnBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Chelse SpinnerBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Samuel ThompsonBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Antonio TomassoBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2869-1969
Crystal M BothamBiosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7510-6112

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Qualifying exams, often referred to as "quals" or candidacy exams, are an important milestone in doctoral programs. Although the style of quals varies greatly by program and institution, it is usually a proposal that requires students to develop research ideas as well as their scientific writing skills. Many quals are modeled after funding mechanisms that graduate students can apply to and on a topic that the student will pursue in their dissertation. This paper offers graduate students a step-by-step guide on how to turn their quals into a fellowship-style research proposal, using National Institutes of Health (NIH) mechanisms as a benchmark, as this is the norm within US research institutions. This paper will be most useful for students who have completed or are in the process of completing proposal-based qualifying exams, usually in the second year of a doctoral program.

Indexed as

Education, Biological and Biomedical Sciences, GraduateFellowships and ScholarshipsEducational MeasurementHumansNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)United States

Identifiers

PMID42313819
PMCPMC13278402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.