" Applications for all levels of Round 11 of the Fellowships Programme have now closed. Five levels of NIHR Fellowship awards were available: Doctoral, Post Doctoral, Transitional Research, Career Development and Senior Research: https://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-...d-career-development/2017-fellowships-r11.htm NIHR Fellowships–Review Panels " The interview panels for the 2017 NIHR Fellowships will be composed from the members listed below." List includes: "Dr Esther Crawley Reader in Child Health, Consultant Senior Lecturer. University of Bristol" "FORMER NIHR FELLOWSHIP PANEL MEMBERS: list includes: Professor Sir Simon Wessely" https://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-...s/TCC-NIHR-Fellowships-Panel-Members-2017.pdf
Maybe we should be asking the NIHR if this is an endorsement for carrying out research without ethical approval.
My mind is boggled. Have these people who think that Crawley is competent to select which research scientists advance actually read her published research?
The NIHR is a big supporter of Crawley. I wonder if there'd be any way to get them to explain why that was.
I assume they have supported her in doing research without ethical approval since she is an NIHR fellow which I assume means they pay for a replacement person to do her lecturing/NHS consulting thus freeing up her time.
NIHR has always seemed to me particularly opaque in its activities. I think Paul Dieppe was the first director and John Pattison for a while, both of whom I know well and I have a lot of respect for, but are certainly political animals. I have recently come across this lady, who seems to be the civil servant in charge of ME research at NIHR: Natalie Owen PhD Natalie Owen joined the Department of Health and Social Care in 2015, following several roles across government as a social researcher. She is part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programmes Branch and manages a portfolio of research across a wide range of Health Improvement themes, including obesity, physical activity, diabetes, screening, older people and frailty, Group B Streptococcus and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. She has a background in health psychology, including a PhD in psychophysiology from University College, London (Michael Marmot's department). She seems very pleasant but seems to keep her cards close to her chest. She was at the second Monaghan debate. She said she was representing the Health Minister and rather implied that that might mean she was on the other side from us ME advocates. I get the impression that she is an observant and intelligent woman. But i doubt she or anyone else is likely to do the necessary explaining. On the other hand we are faced with the question of why NIHR should want to continue to support Dr Crawley is she is unable to answer simple questions about the conduct of her research. It may be something to ask about but my suspicion is that NIHR, having been set up primarily for political reasons, is the least likely organisation to give any useful answers to such questions.
But if it's run by people who are politically aware, then just asking the question so that they become aware of the issue (and it's on record that they were) could be a good thing. Even if they don't answer questions, it might change their future behaviour behind the scenes.
Yes. I think they may already be aware that there is grumbling. The important thing is not to reinforce any perception that this people being vexatious.
"NIHR Research Design Service London is hosting an information session on 27 March 2019 about the NIHR Fellowship Programmes." https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/applying-for-a-nihr-fellowship-tickets-55694308175