Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

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.

Https

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.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021:2:125-130.
doi: 10.1109/ojemb.2021.3070821. Epub 2021 Apr 28.

RADx Tech Viability and Steering Panels: A Model for MedTech Translational Grant Review

Paul Tessier  1 , Michael K Dempsey  1 , John Collins  1 , Steve Schachter  1
Affiliations

RADx Tech Viability and Steering Panels: A Model for MedTech Translational Grant Review

Paul Tessier et al. IEEE Open J Eng Med Biol. 2021.

Abstract

RADxSM Tech's mission is to rapidly accelerate deployment of SARS-CoV-2 tests and could not utilize typical grant application and review processes that can run 4 to 6 months. Instead, RADx Tech leveraged methodologies developed by CIMIT and utilized by POCTRN as described further in this special issue. RADx Tech uses a multi-stage review with two review panels, a Viability Panel and a Steering Panel, that are supported by subject matter experts and a Deep Dive team. Members of the panels have extensive commercialization and business experience in addition to scientific and technical knowledge. The Viability Panel is responsible for assessing whether the proposal is a good fit with the RADx Tech Program and whether it should be recommended to move into a Deep Dive. Less detailed information is requested in the application than a typical SBIR application since the application is refined and details added during the Deep Dive. The Steering Panel reviews the results from the Deep Dive and decides whether to recommend further funding. Everyone on the Viability Panel and Steering Panel reviews every application, thereby providing consistency and context for the reviewers. Utilization of an "assess, improve, and then select" process with review panels comprised of highly experienced review panel members has resulted in improved timing, efficiency, and effectiveness of reviews and has the potential to be extensible beyond RADx Tech.

Keywords: Commercialization; RADx; funding; translational research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
RADx Tech Review Process.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
RADx Tech Project Review Criteria.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Criteria for Advancement to WP2.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Collins J. M. and Dempsey M. K., “Healthcare innovation methodology: Codifying the process of translating knowledge into better healthcare products, services, and procedures,” Curr. Opin. Biomed. Eng., vol. 11, pp. 16–21, Sep. 2019.
    1. Translational Research Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, [Online]. Available: https://tri.uams.edu/about-tri/what-is-translational-research/
    1. Stein E., Lee D., and Gooneratne N., “SBIR/STTR grants: Application guidance,” Academic Entrepreneurship for Med. Health Scientists, vol. 1, no. 2, 2019, Art. no. 9. [Online]. Available: https://repository.upenn.edu/ace/vol1/iss2/9
    1. NIH SBIR/STTR Receipt Dates and Review Schedule, [Online]. Available: https://sbir.nih.gov/apply/submission-dates
    1. National Science Foundation, NSF 17-029, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for SBIR-STTR, [Online]. Available: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2017/nsf17029/nsf17029.jsp