scholarly journals The Neurosurgeon-Scientists National Institutes of Health Funding Trends

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim ReFaey ◽  
Shashwat Tripathi ◽  
William D Freeman ◽  
Hugo Guerrero-Cazares ◽  
James Meschia ◽  
...  

Abstract INTRODUCTION Formal training for physician-scientists is needed more than ever in the field of neurosurgery for the good of the patients and the field. National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding is considered as the most prestigious yet competitive research funding to obtain. This study was performed to determine whether a correlation exists between bibliometrics and NIH funding data among academic neurosurgeons and compare the trends in neurosurgery NIH funding to practicing neurosurgeons and non-neurosurgeons between 1993 to 2017. METHODS Grants to neurosurgery were extracted from the NIH Reporter. Neurosurgery data from 1993 to 2017 were collected; the following parameters were obtained: primary investigators (PIs), grant type, and total funding. Regression models compared NIH funding over time. RESULTS After adjusting for inflation (base year 1993), while funding to both practicing neurosurgeons (P < .00001, R2 = 0.70) and non-neurosurgeons (P < .00001, R2 = 0.61) has been increasing, the percentage of neurosurgery NIH funding going to neurosurgeons (P < .1, R2 = 0.12) is steadily decreasing. Additionally, a total of 542 men were awarded NIH neurosurgery grants compared to 174 women (P < .000001), and the men had a significantly higher average funding per scientist (P < .01). Of the grants awarded to neurosurgery, 30% (213/716) of the awardees were neurosurgeons, and 29% (424/1464) of the awarded grants went to neurosurgeons. There was a rise in active R01 grants 56.4% (207/367) among total active awarded neurosurgery grants, in comparison to the historically awarded R01 rate of 38.2%. CONCLUSION The low percentage of new neurosurgeons awarded NIH grants coupled with the lack of formalized training in residency has the potential to worsen the future pipeline for neurosurgeon-scientists. Future residency programs need to incorporate formalized research training and incentives into training despite escalating economic pressures on departments to see more and more patients.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S Lauer ◽  
Deepshikha Roychowdhury

Previous reports have described worsening inequalities of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding of principal investigators. We analyzed data through the end of Fiscal Year 2020, confirming worsening inequalities beginning at the time of the NIH budget doubling (1998-2003), but finding that trends have reversed over the past 3 years. We also find that career-stage trends have stabilized, with equivalent proportions of early-, mid-, and late-career investigators funded from 2017 to 2020. Women continue to constitute a greater proportion of funded principal investigators, though not at parity. Analyses of funding inequalities over time show that inequalities have consistently been greater within groups (i.e., within groups by career stage, gender, race, and degree) than between groups.


2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (22) ◽  
pp. 12011-12016
Author(s):  
Mikko Packalen ◽  
Jay Bhattacharya

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) plays a critical role in funding scientific endeavors in biomedicine. Funding innovative science is an essential element of the NIH’s mission, but many have questioned the NIH’s ability to fulfill this aim. Based on an analysis of a comprehensive corpus of published biomedical research articles, we measure whether the NIH succeeds in funding work with novel ideas, which we term edge science. We find that edge science is more often NIH funded than less novel science, but with a delay. Papers that build on very recent ideas are NIH funded less often than are papers that build on ideas that have had a chance to mature for at least 7 y. We have three further findings. First, the tendency to fund edge science is mostly limited to basic science. Papers that build on novel clinical ideas are not more often NIH funded than are papers that build on well-established clinical knowledge. Second, novel papers tend to be NIH funded more often because there are more NIH-funded papers in innovative areas of investigation, rather than because the NIH funds innovative papers within research areas. Third, the NIH’s tendency to have funded papers that build on the most recent advances has declined over time. In this regard, NIH funding has become more conservative despite initiatives to increase funding for innovative projects. Given our focus on published papers, the results reflect both the funding preferences of the NIH and the composition of the applications it receives.


CNS Spectrums ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 889-889
Author(s):  
Charles B. Nemeroff

The number of graduating psychiatry residents who choose a career in academic medicine is remarkably small, and the percentage who become National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded investigators is even smaller. Although this trend for a reduced number of physician-scientists is true in all branches of medicine and has reached criticialproportions, the perception is that this shortage is even more severe in psychiatry. The purpose of this essay is to increase awareness of the problem and begin a discussion of the reasons why the field finds itself in this problematic situation.First, however, it is important to more clearly define the nature of the problem. At the current time, NIH funding for research and training grants (Research Career Development Awards) has attained unprecedentedly high levels, with the percent of submitted applications that are funded higher than ever thought possible. Physicians who submit NIH grant applications are as successful as their PhD colleagues, dispelling the myth that physicians cannot compete with PhDs for such funding. Others have raised the question as to whether physicians are necessary or even desirable as investigators. In other words, the entire concept of a clinician-scientist is considered by some to be simply passé.


2017 ◽  
Vol 140 (6) ◽  
pp. 1301-1311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Silvestre ◽  
Joseph M. Abbatematteo ◽  
Benjamin Chang ◽  
Joseph M. Serletti

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 318-318
Author(s):  
Mariam Kayle ◽  
Sharron Docherty ◽  
Paula Tanabe ◽  
Richard Sloane ◽  
Gary Maslow ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with sickle cell disease (SCD) are at increased risk for disease complications and mortality, particularly during transition to adult care. Little is known about the disease course that might be contributing to the increase in morbidity and mortality during transition. This study provides a longitudinal description of the clinical characteristics and disease severity among AYAs with SCD during transition to adult care. Methods We conducted a longitudinal analysis of the electronic health records of 339 AYAs (ages 12-27 years) with SCD (97% black, 56% male, 69% hemoglobin SS) who received care at a comprehensive SCD center in the Southeast US between 1989 and 2015. Measures included sociodemographics, transfer, complications, comorbidities, and severity of SCD (using a modification of the pediatric SCD severity index). We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify subgroups of AYAs with distinct severity trajectories. AYAs who were in care for at least 10 years were included (n=133). We used chi-square and unpaired student t-test to explore subgroup differences among (1) AYAs who died compared to AYAs who were still alive during the study; (2) AYAs who were eligible to transfer (i.e., ≥ 19 years) (n=293) and transferred compared to AYAs who were eligible to transfer and did not transfer; and (3) AYAs with different severity trajectories. Statistical significance was set at p=0.05 and 95% CI. Results Common complications among AYAs (n=339) included vaso-occlusive crises (80%), acute chest syndrome (41%), chronic pain (35%), and cerebral infarcts (22%). Comorbidities included depression (19%) and anxiety (14%). Most AYAs who were eligible to transfer transferred (n=220, 75%) at a mean age of 19 years (SD=1.3). Fourteen AYAs died, 10 (71%) after transfer at a mean of 7.3 years (SD=3.1) from transfer. SCD Severity Trajectories (Figure 1): Group-based trajectory modeling identified both stable and increasing severity trajectory groups: stable-low (n=31, 23%), stable-medium (n= 61, 46%), stable-high (n=6, 5%), low-increasing (n=13, 10%), and medium-increasing (n= 22,17%) severity trajectory groups. Most AYAs (74%) had stable severity over time, whereas 26% had increased severity with increasing age. Subgroup Differences in Care and Mortality: AYAs who died (n=14) spent less time in pediatric care (mean=4.6 years, 95%CI 3.7-5.6), however, had a higher mean number of pediatric annual visits (mean=9.3 visits; 95%CI 6.3-12.3) compared to those who were alive (n=324, mean=6 years in pediatric care, 95%CI 5.7-6.1; mean number of pediatric annual visits=5.4, 95%CI 4.8-6.1). There were no differences in demographics, SCD complications, or morbidity. Subgroup Differences in Transfer to Adult Care (Tables 1 and 2): Compared to AYAs who did not transfer, AYAs who transferred were older and lived closer to the SCD clinic. AYAs who transferred were at higher risk for SCD complications and comorbidities. They were more likely to be receiving hydroxyurea. They had higher mean annual pediatric SCD clinic visits, especially during older adolescence, and were in pediatric care for a longer duration. Subgroup Differences in Disease Severity (Tables 3 and 4). Compared to AYAs in stable severity trajectory groups (Figure 1: Groups 1, 3, and 5), AYAs in unstable disease severity trajectory groups (Figure 1: Groups 2 and 4) were more likely to be married, older, and lived closer to the SCD clinic. AYAs in unstable groups were also at higher risk for SCD complications and comorbidities. They were less likely to be receiving treatments and had less pediatric SCD clinic visits by age 18. However, they were more likely to transfer to adult care, have had more adult SCD visits overall, and remained longer in adult SCD care after transfer. Conclusions Whereas most AYAs with SCD had stable disease severity, nearly a quarter had increasing disease severity, over time. AYAs with increasing severity lived closer to the SCD clinic, were more likely to transfer to adult care, and demonstrated higher and longer use of adult SCD care compared to AYAs with stable disease severity. Genotype was not associated with disease severity trajectory groups, underscoring the importance of clinical care for AYAs, over time. Disclosures Kayle: Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living, NIDILRR Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training Health and Function Grant #90AR5019 (PI Heinemann): Other: post-doctoral fellowship; Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living, NIDILRR Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training Health and Function Grant # 90ARHF0003 (PI Heinemann): Other: Postdoctoral fellowship. Tanabe:Duke University: Employment; NIH and AHRQ: Research Funding; Alliant Health: Consultancy. Maslow:The Crohn's and Colitis Foundation and the American Gastroenterological Association, in collaboration with Pfizer, Inc: Research Funding. Holl:Before Brands, Inc: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Branstad Family Foundation: Research Funding; AHRQ: Research Funding. Shah:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Author(s):  
Sheng-Jun WANG ◽  
Li-Juan LIU ◽  
Guang-Yue JI ◽  
Xiao-Hua (Andrew) ZHOU ◽  
Tian-Jiao JIANG ◽  
...  

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of faculty and research activities of basic stem cell research groups in China. Methods: A questionnaire was administered to persons who knew the information among 46 basic stem cell research groups in China. Multiple linear regression models and repeated-measures analyses of variance were used. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were used. Results: Of the 46 groups, 39.1% did not have any faculty recruited from abroad from 2009 to 2013, 37.0% did not have any faculty with junior-level title, 34.8% had ≤25.0% faculty with either M.D. or Ph.D. degree. Papers published in SCI journals per faculty and having faculty recruited from abroad were positively associated with research funding per faculty. The groups with faculty recruited from abroad had significantly higher research funding per faculty over time compared with the group without faculty recruited from abroad. Repeated-measures analyses of variance showed the group with faculty recruited from abroad had significantly higher research funding per faculty over time compared with the group without faculty recruited from abroad. Conclusion: To increase the development of basic stem cell research, some characteristics of human resources should be improved, and the groups should recruit more faculty with overseas experience.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Russell R. Lonser ◽  
Luke G. F. Smith ◽  
Michael Tennekoon ◽  
Kavon P. Rezai-Zadeh ◽  
Jeffrey G. Ojemann ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVETo increase the number of independent National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded neurosurgeons and to enhance neurosurgery research, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) developed two national comprehensive programs (R25 [established 2009] for residents/fellows and K12 [2013] for early-career neurosurgical faculty) in consultation with neurosurgical leaders and academic departments to support in-training and early-career neurosurgeons. The authors assessed the effectiveness of these NINDS-initiated programs to increase the number of independent NIH-funded neurosurgeon-scientists and grow NIH neurosurgery research funding.METHODSNIH funding data for faculty and clinical department funding were derived from the NIH, academic departments, and Blue Ridge Institute of Medical Research databases from 2006 to 2019.RESULTSBetween 2009 and 2019, the NINDS R25 funded 87 neurosurgical residents. Fifty-three (61%) have completed the award and training, and 39 (74%) are in academic practice. Compared to neurosurgeons who did not receive R25 funding, R25 awardees were twice as successful (64% vs 31%) in obtaining K-series awards and received the K-series award in a significantly shorter period of time after training (25.2 ± 10.1 months vs 53.9 ± 23.0 months; p < 0.004). Between 2013 and 2019, the NINDS K12 has supported 19 neurosurgeons. Thirteen (68%) have finished their K12 support and all (100%) have applied for federal funding. Eleven (85%) have obtained major individual NIH grant support. Since the establishment of these two programs, the number of unique neurosurgeons supported by either individual (R01 or DP-series) or collaborative (U- or P-series) NIH grants increased from 36 to 82 (a 2.3-fold increase). Overall, NIH funding to clinical neurological surgery departments between 2006 and 2019 increased from $66.9 million to $157.3 million (a 2.2-fold increase).CONCLUSIONSTargeted research education and career development programs initiated by the NINDS led to a rapid and dramatic increase in the number of NIH-funded neurosurgeon-scientists and total NIH neurosurgery department funding.


Author(s):  
Peter Doehring

AbstractThe present study explored the shift from understanding to intervention to population impact in the empirical research published in this journal at five points of time over 40 years since the release of DSM-III. Two-thirds of the more than 600 original studies identified involved basic research, a pattern that is consistent with previous analyses of research funding allocations and that did not change over time. One of every eight studies involved intervention research, which occurred in community-based programs only about one-quarter of the time. These gaps in intervention research and community impact did not improve over time. The findings underscore the need to broaden the training and experience of researchers, and to re-consider priorities for research funding and publication.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-60
Author(s):  
Kristine M. Kulage ◽  
Joshua R. Massei ◽  
Elaine L. Larson

Ordinal rankings of schools of nursing by research funding in total dollars awarded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a common metric for demonstrating research productivity; however, these data are not based on the number of doctorally prepared faculty eligible to apply for funding. Therefore, we examined an alternative method for measuring research productivity which accounts for size differences in schools: NIH funding ranked “per capita.” We extracted data on total average funding and compared them with average funding secured per faculty member across top-ranked schools of nursing in the United States from 2013 to 2017. When examining data by number of doctorally prepared faculty, 4 of 12 (33%) schools that ranked lower in total average funding ranked higher in average funding per faculty member. School size is an important but neglected factor in current funding rankings; therefore, we encourage schools to use multiple approaches to track their research productivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document