Osteology Researcher Grants

The Osteology Foundation funds clinical and translational research.

The term “translational” refers here to pre-clinical and/or in vitro research that links basic findings from laboratory work to clinical science. 

The Osteology Foundation follows the definition of translational medicine by the European Society for Translational Medicine[1] that reaches beyond the linear “bench to bedside” concept.
Thus, financial support may be granted for in vitro studies that take clinical findings and/or community needs back to the laboratory bench to create innovative research hypotheses, driving new discoveries.

Research topics falling within the scope of the Osteology Foundation are:

1. - Hard and soft tissue biology: clinical aspects
2. - Novel bone and soft tissue substitute materials
3. - Local factors affecting oral tissue regeneration
4. - Systemic diseases with an impact on oral tissue regeneration
5. - Pharmacological aspects of oral tissue regeneration
6. - Inflammatory conditions, e.g. periodontitis or peri-implantitis
    

List of publications from studies funded by the Osteology Foundation
 

The application process consists of two stages.

Applicants can submit an abstract of their proposed project by 15 June and 1 December (23:59 CET). The Science Committee of the Osteology Foundation selects projects which then progress to the second stage.

Applicants are invited to submit their full application. On average, 25% of all applicants from the first stage are given this opportunity. Submission deadlines are 15 October and 15 April (23:59 CET).

Each submission is evaluated by a scientific review board, which is constituted of four Expert Council members and one Science Committee member (lead reviewer). The reviewers are assigned to the different applications according to their field of expertise and under consideration of greatest impartiality. The final decision for funding of a research proposal is made during the Science Committee meeting, where all four Science Committee members discuss the full applications based on the evaluation of the reviewers and in light of the awarding criteria. The Science Committee takes final decisions unanimously. Biased committee members (e.g. co-applicants, mutual institutional affiliation) are excluded from the decision making process.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2307502314000782