Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx) Blog
Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx) Blog
Posted by ma403
30 January 2026It takes an army to secure PhD funding. That was my second thought when I was told last year that I was successful in landing a Wellcome NIHR SPCR Primary Care Clinician Doctoral fellowship. My first one was, âI am going to sleep well tonight!â.
As I set off on my PhD journey and begin to explore my research questions in earnest this year, it feels like the right moment to share what helped me reach this stage. If I had to share only one thing, it would be that landing this fellowship came from recognising where I needed help and being willing to ask for it.
Laying the foundations early
The groundwork for my funding application started years before the actual deadline and my academic supervisor, Prof. Richard Neal, played a huge role in this journey. During the early part of my GP academic clinical fellowship (ACF), our focus was simply to find a topic area that genuinely interested me. We spent significant time identifying this and once identified he encouraged me to develop my own research question. Extensive reading and work on a scoping review, ultimately laid the foundations for my research question for the PhD application.
Richard would continuously ask: How big is the problem? What impact will your work have? Yes, this is interesting, but what difference will it make? Answers to those questions were crucial for structuring the background of my proposal.
Alongside the above research work, I was collaborating with colleagues on projects I found interesting. This helped me develop research skills organically. Meanwhile, clinical work continued in the background, as it always does for clinical academics. My curiosity around policy structures led me to take on leadership roles, which gave me ideas around dissemination, real-world impact, policy, and working within teams, all highly relevant to research.
Timing, training, and planning
I was slightly out of sync with the August GP training cohort, having had time waived from training due to prior obstetrics and gynaecology experience. Initially, this felt like a disadvantage, as I missed eligibility windows for certain in-practice fellowships and deadlines which would fit neatly with an August completion of training date. As I was due to finish training in February 2025, with the Wellcome NIHR SPCR fellowship deadline in December (before CCT), careful and early planning was essential to avoid long gaps in protected academic time. The application plans started rolling following a WellcomeâNIHR SPCR webinar, which helped me understand the fellowship landscape and set the tone on expectations.
The supervisory team
In the 3 months leading up to the application deadline, I had regular meetings with my supervisor to refine the topic area and shape my PhD question and work packages. During this time, I also brainstormed potential additional supervisors including an external supervisor from another university to allow cross organisational collaborations. My final supervisory team picked, had the experience and expertise in areas that I needed guidance on to deliver on the aims of my project:
Each of my supervisors brought to my application much more than what I mentioned above. They influenced and refined the project questions, helped develop my training plans based on a researcher development framework needs assessment and the proposal seemed to continuously evolve till very close to the deadline.
Peer support and feedback
Very early on, when my project ideas were far from polished, I involved other speciality colleagues and fellow ACFs to help me out. They generously reviewed my proposal and provided feedback. Many were applying for funding themselves or hearing back from funders, so they were very much in the âthinking zone.â Their questions and suggestions substantially shaped and strengthened my ideas.
In parallel, I spoke with previous award holders, three with the same award and two others who had secured doctoral funding in the previous two years. Each conversation provided pearls of wisdom, insights into what to prioritise, and advice on aspects I hadnât fully considered, including project-specific nuances.
Public involvement
I had worked with public contributors during my scoping review, so I returned to them for support in shaping the PhD project, plans for engagement with people and patients, and continued involvement. I also watched all the NIHR PPI videos (available on youtube) and carefully read all the available guidance on the NIHR website. These helped me shape my PhD plans and answers in my application.
Institutional and methodological support
Early in my ACF, I had established links with the NIHR Research Support Service (RSS), initially for help with PPI and ethics on another project. Understanding their strengths, I reconnected with those contacts during this application. Darren Dunning deserves a special mention as he reviewed my application at multiple stages and provided detailed, invaluable feedback.
I also met with the University of Exeter finance teams. Although full costing wasnât required at the application stage, it was essential to ensure the project was feasible within the funding envelope. This activity helped refine PPI activities and costs. I explored CPRD costs in detail, which influenced database selection and further shaped the research plan. An added benefit of this exercise was me getting additional application review and ideas from university research support staff members who had experience of being in rooms during funding interviews.
As the application firmed up (2 days before the deadline), Jane Smith, our departmental lead for training and capacity development, reviewed it. You might think at that stage improvements would be limited, but they never are. Jane sharpened the application further.
Submission phase
By the time of submission, I vividly remember working regular 16â18 hour days, balancing clinical commitments and research work. I wouldnât recommend this approach, but Iâm not sure how else I could have completed everything to a standard I was comfortable with.
There were days I struggled. Family and friends provided much-needed support, and conversations with other clinical academics helped enormously. Special mention to Nada Khan and Sarah Moore for reassuring me that this phase of writing is particularly tough, and that persistence matters.
The interview
I read my invite email multiple times as I could not believe that I landed an interview. Next stage was ensuring I gave it my all.
The interview involved a five-minute presentation on my PhD plans, followed by questions. Preparing for this was a major undertaking and I spent hours refining the presentation to be concise and impactful. I watched the NIHR masterclass on presentation skills and practised until I knew exactly what I wanted to say and within the timing. I even memorised key sections as thatâs what works best for me. Input on improvements came from everywhere:
My family, especially my husband and children, provided invaluable âlayâ feedback, asking questions that forced me to explain concepts clearly.
For questions preparation, I sought help widely: people in our department who had sat on interview panels and were experts in this area (Willie Hamilton), those with methods expertise, specialists in different aspects of the project, PPI contributors who ran a mock interview, and many colleagues including Vincent Simpson, Robert Kimmitt and Sam Trenthway (ACF endocrinology, renal and public health colleagues) who supported me throughout. Judit Konya, Tanimola Martins and Ian Porter among others, provided crucial advice and encouragement. Support came in the form of mock interviews, elaborate discussions on specific aspects of the project and deep dive into my training plans and priorities.
I reached out to previous award holders, in some instances making first contact on social media for guidance. They helpfully shared their interview experiences. One piece of advice given by James Coughlan stuck with me: Everyone has a good project so remember to share your USP. What have you done that others in your position might not have explored? Tom Kallis, one of our departmental Wellcome NIHR SPCR awardees, helped with structured preparation and direction of planning. In short, I asked for help and followed all the guidance I could get.
On the day
The interview itself was enjoyable and calm. The questions were thoughtful, nothing unexpected, and the panel were warm and supportive. I was honest and genuine in my responses, without pretence and the outcome, as we all know now, indicates that my approach worked!
The process of a doctoral application was surely tough and not one I would like to go through again..but did it shape me for the better? It did. Did it strengthen relations I had with my colleagues? It sure did.
I should say I am incredibly grateful to everyone who supported me along the way to get me here. It truly takes an army to secure a PhD fellowship, and Iâm deeply thankful for the force I had and have around me. Thank you, APEx.
