scholarly journals A generation at risk: Young investigators and the future of the biomedical workforce

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald J. Daniels
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Career Paths ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Research Grants ◽  
The Us ◽  
Major Factors ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
The University

A number of distressing trends, including a decline in the share of key research grants going to younger scientists, as well as a steady rise in the age at which investigators receive their first funding, are now a decades-long feature of the US biomedical research workforce. Working committees have proposed recommendations, policy makers have implemented reforms, and yet the trajectory of our funding regime away from young scientists has only worsened. An investigation of some of the major factors and their geneses at play in explaining the increasing average age to first RO1 is presented. Recommendations related to funding, peer review, career paths, and the university–government partnership are provided.

Geographical equity between outputs of biomedical research grants and research capability as an indicator of the peer-review process for grant applications

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-230
Author(s):  
Grant Lewison ◽  
Steven Lipworth ◽  
Isla Rippon ◽  
Philip Roe ◽  
Rob Cottrell
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Grants ◽  
Grant Applications

scholarly journals 2017 Sowing the “CEED”s of a more diverse biomedical workforce

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 60-61
Author(s):  
Colleen A. Mayowski ◽  
Kaleab Z. Abebe ◽  
Natalia E. Morone ◽  
Doris M. Rubio ◽  
Wishwa N. Kapoor
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Health Care Research ◽  
Assistant Professor ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Seminar Series ◽  
Leaky Pipeline ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
The University

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The need to diversify the biomedical research workforce is well documented. The Career Education and Enhancement for Health Care Research Diversity (CEED) program at the University of Pittsburgh Institute for Clinical Research Education (ICRE) promotes success and helps seal the “leaky pipeline” for under-represented background (URB) biomedical researchers with a purposefully designed program consisting of a monthly seminar series, multilevel mentoring, targeted coursework, and networking. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Over 10 program years, we collected survey data on characteristics of CEED Scholars, such as race, ethnicity, and current position. We created a matched set of URB trainees not enrolled in CEED during that time using propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Since 2007, CEED has graduated 45 Scholars. Seventy-six percent have been women, 78% have been non-White, and 33% have been Hispanic/Latino. Scholars include 20 M.D.s and 25 Ph.D.s. Twenty-eight CEED Scholars were matched to non-CEED URB students. Compared with matched URB students, CEED graduates had a higher mean number of peer-reviewed publications (9.25 vs. 5.89; p<0.0001) were more likely to hold an assistant professor position (54% vs. 14%; p=0.004) and be in the tenure stream (32% vs. 7%; p=0.04), respectively. There were no differences in Career Development Awards (p=0.42) or Research Project Grants (p=0.24). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Programs that support URB researchers can help expand and diversify the biomedical research workforce. CEED has been successful despite the challenges of a small demographic pool. Further efforts are needed to assist URB researchers to obtain grant awards.

scholarly journals National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (40) ◽  
pp. 12240-12242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah A. Valantine ◽  
Francis S. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Institutional Barriers ◽  
Scientific Exploration ◽  
The Us ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
Scientific Workforce ◽  
And Training ◽  
Science Evidence

The US biomedical research workforce does not currently mirror the nation’s population demographically, despite numerous attempts to increase diversity. This imbalance is limiting the promise of our biomedical enterprise for building knowledge and improving the nation’s health. Beyond ensuring fairness in scientific workforce representation, recruiting and retaining a diverse set of minds and approaches is vital to harnessing the complete intellectual capital of the nation. The complexity inherent in diversifying the research workforce underscores the need for a rigorous scientific approach, consistent with the ways we address the challenges of science discovery and translation to human health. Herein, we identify four cross-cutting diversity challenges ripe for scientific exploration and opportunity: research evidence for diversity’s impact on the quality and outputs of science; evidence-based approaches to recruitment and training; individual and institutional barriers to workforce diversity; and a national strategy for eliminating barriers to career transition, with scientifically based approaches for scaling and dissemination. Evidence-based data for each of these challenges should provide an integrated, stepwise approach to programs that enhance diversity rapidly within the biomedical research workforce.

scholarly journals Wealth of Wisdom Generated by the Scientist Rimantas Kontvainas

Pedagogika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 126 (2) ◽  
pp. 254-258
Author(s):  
Marijona Barkauskaitė
Keyword(s):  
Educational Policy ◽  
Career Paths ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Public Figure ◽  
Lead Teachers ◽  
Educational Sciences ◽  
The University ◽  
Constant Improvement

The publication presents some of the significant writings of the scientist, geographer, active public figure who contributed to the efficient functioning of Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences in promoting the university and its constant improvement by educating teachers, managers and young scientists for educational institutions, through which career paths lead teachers to become not only educational policy-makers, but also statesmen and stateswomen.

scholarly journals Blinding applicants in a first-stage peer-review process of biomedical research grants: An observational study

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maite Solans-Domènech ◽  
Imma Guillamón ◽  
Aida Ribera ◽  
Ignacio Ferreira-González ◽  
Carme Carrion ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Grants

scholarly journals Sowing the “CEED”s of a more diverse biomedical workforce: The Career Education and Enhancement for Health Care Research Diversity (CEED) program at the University of Pittsburgh

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26
Author(s):  
Kaleab Z. Abebe ◽  
Natalia E. Morone ◽  
Colleen A. Mayowski ◽  
Doris M. Rubio ◽  
Wishwa K. Kapoor
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Career Education ◽  
Health Care Research ◽  
Assistant Professor ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
The University

AbstractPurpose:The need to diversify the biomedical research workforce is well documented. The importance of fostering the careers of fledgling underrepresented background (URB) biomedical researchers is evident in light of the national and local scarcity of URB scientists in biomedical research. The Career Education and Enhancement for Health Care Research Diversity (CEED) program at the University of Pittsburgh Institute for Clinical Research Education (ICRE) was designed to promote career success and help seal the “leaky pipeline” for URB researchers. In this study, we aimed to quantify CEED’s effect on several key outcomes by comparing CEED Scholars to a matched set of URB ICRE trainees not enrolled in CEED using data collected over 10 years.Method:We collected survey data on CEED Scholars from 2007 to 2017 and created a matched set of URB trainees not enrolled in CEED using propensity score matching in a 1:1 ratio. Poisson regression was used to compare the rate of publications between CEED and non-CEED URB trainees after adjusting for baseline number of publications.Results:CEED has 45 graduates. Seventy-six percent are women, 78% are non-White, and 33% are Hispanic/Latino. Twenty-four CEED Scholars were matched to non-CEED URB trainees. Compared to matched URB trainees, CEED graduates had more peer-reviewed publications (p=0.0261) and were more likely to be an assistant professor (p=0.0145).Conclusions:Programs that support URB researchers can help expand and diversify the biomedical research workforce. CEED has been successful despite the challenges of a small demographic pool.

scholarly journals Investigating the US biomedical workforce: Gender, field of training, and retention

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 913-926
Author(s):  
Anne E Winkler ◽  
Sharon G Levin ◽  
Michael T Allison
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Interdisciplinary Training ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Restricted Use ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
Scientific Workforce

Abstract The biomedical research workforce plays a crucial role in fostering economic growth and improving public health through discoveries and innovations. This study fills a knowledge gap by providing a comprehensive portrait of this workforce and retention within it. A distinguishing feature is that we use an occupation-based definition which allows us to look ‘backward’ to field of training and assess the extent to which it has grown more interdisciplinary, and how this differs by gender. The analysis is conducted using restricted-use SESTAT data, the most comprehensive dataset on the scientific workforce in the USA, for the years 1993, 2003, and 2010. Among the findings, we identify differences in interdisciplinarity in training by gender, and these differences have widened. In the retention analysis, which focuses on the 7-year period, 2003–10, we find that retention is negatively and significantly associated with interdisciplinary training for women, but not for men.

scholarly journals Early history and rationale for outdoor chamber work at the University of North Carolina

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey E. Jeffries ◽  
Richard M. Kamens ◽  
Kenneth Sexton
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
Atmospheric Chemistry ◽  
Human Lung ◽  
University Of North Carolina ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Human Lung Cells ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ozone Precursor ◽  
The University

Environmental context Imagine in 1968 having to tell the largest cities in the US that they would have to spend billions of dollars to reduce human exposure to a gas in their air that no one emitted and that no one knew for sure how it came to be there. This history recalls how scientists and policy makers met this challenge so that by 1985 effective programs were in place. Abstract The University of North Carolina (UNC) outdoor chamber facility was established in 1972. The chamber produces reliable and interpretable results using ambient sunlight, temperature and weather, providing an effective physical model system for learning about atmospheric chemistry. This article recounts the 40-year history of the chamber facility, from the early days in understanding ozone–precursor relationship to the latest in studying gas and particulate toxicities on human lung cells.

scholarly journals How the US can best support the careers of promising young biomedical scientists

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Alberts ◽  
Tony Hyman ◽  
Chris Pickett ◽  
Shirley Tilghman ◽  
Harold Varmus
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Constant Infusion ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Major Threat ◽  
Innovative Research ◽  
The Us ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
The U.S

A vibrant American biomedical research enterprise requires a constant infusion of young scientists proposing and conducting important, innovative research. Demographic analyses indicate that the biomedical research workforce has been aging, with scientists launching independent academic laboratories much later in their lives than previously. In addition, those starting new laboratories encounter strong pressures discouraging novel, potentially groundbreaking research. These two factors represent a major threat to the vitality of biomedical research in the U.S. Based on recent analyses demonstrating the success of such programs, we propose that the NIH expand by ten-fold its use of the New Innovator award—an award available only to young scientists proposing innovative research. We argue that this action, accompanied by two related policy changes, would dramatically improve the U.S. biomedical research enterprise.

scholarly journals Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

2017 ◽  
Vol 121 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Liaw ◽  
Jane E. Freedman ◽  
Lance B. Becker ◽  
Nehal N. Mehta ◽  
Laura Liscum
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
American Heart Association ◽  
American Heart ◽  
Heart Association ◽  
Research Grants ◽  
Scientific Statement
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document