July 22, 2025
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has recently announced a significant policy change aimed at regulating the use of artificial intelligence in grant applications. This decision comes in response to a growing trend where Principal Investigators (PIs) have been submitting an excessive number of applications, some of which have reportedly been generated using AI tools.
Under the new guidelines, researchers are now limited to submitting a maximum of six applications—whether they are new, renewal, resubmission, or revision—per calendar year. This cap is intended to streamline the application process and ensure that the quality of submissions remains high. Principal Investigators, who lead research studies, will need to be more selective in their proposals moving forward.
The NIH has observed that some PIs have submitted over 40 distinct applications in a single round, raising concerns about the integrity of the application process. Michael Lauer, a former deputy director at the NIH, noted that this trend has been alarming, as it undermines the purpose of thorough and thoughtful research proposals.
According to the new policy, any application that is significantly developed by AI will not be considered an original idea from the applicant. This raises questions about the threshold for what constitutes substantial AI involvement, as the NIH has not provided specific guidelines on this matter. Researchers may face funding losses if their applications are deemed to have over-relied on AI tools.
The NIH has stated that if AI usage is detected after a grant has been awarded, the case may be referred to the Office of Research Integrity. This could lead to serious consequences, including the disallowance of costs, withholding of future awards, or even termination of the grant.
In a statement to the media, the NIH expressed that as AI technology becomes more prevalent, it is crucial to manage its impact on the application process. The agency aims to prevent an overload of its review systems, which could hinder the evaluation of genuine research proposals.
Despite these new restrictions, the NIH anticipates that only a small percentage of researchers will be affected. In fact, only 1.3 percent of applicants submitted more than six applications in the previous year. It is also important to note that collaborative submissions involving co-investigators will not count towards the six-application limit.
Interestingly, the announcement of these restrictions coincides with discussions about potential budget cuts to the NIH, which could impact funding availability for researchers. A faculty member from a public university expressed support for the new policy, provided that the NIH’s budget remains stable. She highlighted the challenges of securing funding in a potentially reduced budget environment.
On social media, experts have commented on the implications of these changes, with some suggesting that a few individuals misusing AI tools have led to stricter regulations for everyone. The NIH has clarified that the new policy will not apply to certain types of grant applications, such as R13 conference grants or T activity codes, which are designed for training purposes.