Research Grants

ISTM is pleased to offer Travel Medicine Research Grants to ISTM Members each year. Grants are awarded through a peer-review process implemented by the ISTM Research and Awards Committee. The awards are designed to stimulate travel medicine research by supporting comprehensive research projects or, for larger projects, providing support for pilot studies to enable researchers to collect data/test hypotheses so that they can then apply to other agencies for more substantive research grants.

Typical awards will be in the range of USD 5,000 to USD 10,000 although a single grant up to USD 40,000 will be considered for exceptional proposals. Detailed information on proposal criteria, as well as application forms, can be provided by the ISTM Secretariat.

ISTM offers a number of programs to help support and expand research in travel medicine. Each year, the Society supports research grants for cutting-edge research in the field.

It is hoped that these grants will stimulate travel medicine research by supporting comprehensive research projects or, for larger projects, provide support for pilot studies to enable researchers to collect data or test hypotheses.

Award requirements include:

  • Research must be travel medicine or immigrant/refugee health oriented
  • Application and protocol proposal must be scientifically sound and must be in accordance with international ethical guidelines
  • There must be no conflicts of interest for any of the investigators who apply for research funding
  • Grant applicants must be ISTM members in good standing
  • Projects should be able to be realistically completed using ISTM grant funding alone.
ISTM has opened the call for Research Award proposals to non-ISTM members who reside in countries identified by the World Bank as low income and low-middle income. We are committed to foster and support research in areas of the world where opportunities are otherwise limited. To see which countries are included, the World Bank economic listing can be found here.

Scoring of Proposals

All proposals received by the deadline will go through a blind, peer-review process. The following system is used to score each proposal.

Proposal Section Points Available out of Total
Hypothesis and study questions (Total of 5 pts)
No hypothesis or question; No study aim 0-1 pts
Hypothesis vague or not stated clearly 2-3 pts
Hypothesis stated clearly 4-5 pts
Objectives (Total of 10 Pts)
No objectives; Aim of study unclear; Objectives unrealistic 0-3 pts
Vague or undefined objectives; Some parts are achievable 4-7 pts
Objectives clear and focused; Objectives are achievable and realistic 8-10 pts
Significance (Total of 15 pts)
Narrow focus; Minimal interest; Not likely to contribute to increased knowledge or practice change; Unlikely to stimulate additional studies 0-5 pts
Limited to moderate general interest; Some potential for change of practice or to support further study 6-10 pts
Study is doable and will be of wide general interest; Potential to contribute to practice change or evidence basis of current practice; Strong potential to support further studies 11-15 pts
Originality (Total of 15 pts)
Lack of new ideas; No novel methods; Repeats prior work 0-5 pts
Some original elements; Some original methods; Approach offers some innovation 6-10 pts
New concepts or hypotheses; Innovative methods or ideas; Novel approach or design 11-15 pts
Research plan (Total of 30 pts)
Poorly described; Approach unrealistic or impractical; Analysis plan incomplete; Ethical statement lacking; Lack of clear relationship to hypothesis; Methodologic weaknesses; Unrealistic timeline 0-10 pts
Some or most elements described clearly; Methodology acceptable; Some information about analysis plan; Ethical plan mentioned; Relates somewhat to hypothesis; Some methodologic weaknesses; Possible to accomplish in the time available. 11-20 pts
Described clearly and completely; Relates clearly to stated aims; Analysis plan clear and appropriate; Clear ethics statement; Clear relationship to addressing hypothesis; Few to no methodologic weaknesses; Realistic to accomplish in the time available 21-30 pts
Budget, budget justification (15 pts)
Unrealistic; Budget justification lacking or incomplete; Inappropriate; Too much focus on travel or senior investigator costs 0-5 pts
Mostly realistic; Justification present but limited; Most elements appropriate 6-10 pts
Realistic for the project; Justification clear and appropriate; Targeted toward appropriate expenditures 11-15 pts
Relation to ISTM (Total of 10 pts)
Unrelated to ISTM goals; No statement relating to ISTM goals 0-3 pts
Some relation to ISTM goals; ISTM mentioned 4-7 pts
Clear relationship to ISTM goals; Statement of relationship to ISTM 8-10 pts
Total for Each Proposal - Maximum of 100 points

Top of page

Find the winning Research Award projects here.