Cuts to high-profile NIH efforts leave researchers reeling.

Drop in 21st Century Cures Act funding will slow BRAIN and All of Us projects.

National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Reporting in Medicare Claims Data: Reporting in the First 3 Years.

BACKGROUND: Since 2016, hospitals have been able to document International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes for the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). As of 2023, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services uses NIHSS as a risk adjustment variable. We assessed associations between patient- and hospital-level variables and contemporary NIHSS reporting. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 2019 acute ischemic stroke admissions using deidentified, national 100% inpatient Medicare Fee-For-Service data sets. We identified index acute ischemic stroke admissions using the ICD-10-CM code I63.x and abstracted demographic information, medical comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and NIHSS. We linked Medicare and Mount Sinai Health System (New York, NY) registry data from 2016 to 2019. We calculated NIHSS documentation at the patient and hospital levels, predictors of documentation, change over time, and concordance with local data. RESULTS: There were 231 383 index acute ischemic stroke admissions in 2019. NIHSS was documented in 44.4% of admissions and by 66.5% of hospitals. Hospitals that documented ≥1 NIHSS were more commonly teaching hospitals (39.0% versus 5.5%; standardized mean difference score, 0.88), stroke certified (37.2% versus 8.0%; standardized mean difference score, 0.75), higher volume (mean, 80.8 [SD, 92.6] versus 6.33 [SD, 14.1]; standardized mean difference score, 1.12), and had intensive care unit availability (84.9% versus 23.2%; standardized mean difference score, 1.57). Adjusted odds of documentation were lower for patients with inpatient mortality (odds ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.61-0.68]; P<0.0001), in nonmetropolitan areas (odds ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.61]; P<0.0001), and male sex (odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.93-0.97]; P<0.0001). NIHSS was documented for 52.9% of Medicare cases versus 93.1% of registry cases, and 74.7% of Medicare NIHSS scores equaled registry admission NIHSS. CONCLUSIONS: Missing ICD-10-CM NIHSS data remain widespread 3 years after the introduction of the ICD-10-CM NIHSS code, and there are systematic differences in reporting at the patient and hospital levels. These findings support continued assessment of NIHSS reporting and caution in its application to risk adjustment models.

Ending "domestic helicopter research".

"Helicopter research" refers to a practice where researchers from wealthier countries conduct studies in lower-income countries with little involvement of local researchers or community members. This practice also occurs domestically. In this Commentary, we outline strategies to curb domestic helicopter research and to foster equity-centered collaborations.

Underfunding for Research Training and Career Development: The Impact on Family Medicine Research.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The National Institutes of Health and related federal awards for research training (RT) and research career development (RCD) are designed to prepare applicants for research careers. We compared funding rates for RT and RCD for anesthesiology, dermatology, emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, neurology, obstetrics-gynecology, pathology, pediatrics, and psychiatry. METHODS: We estimated the denominator using the number of residency graduates from different specialties from 2001 to 2010 from the Association of American Medical Colleges data. For the numerator, we used published data on federally funded awards by specialty from 2011 to 2020. We also examined the correlation between RCD funding and overall research funding. RESULTS: Family medicine had the lowest rate per graduating resident for RT (0.01%) and RCD (0.77%) awards among 10 specialties and was lower than the mean/median for the other nine specialties, ranging from 2.15%/1.19% and 9.83%/8.74%. We found a strong correlation between rates of RCD awards and mean federal funding per active physician, which was statistically significant (ρ=0.77, P=.0098). CONCLUSIONS: Comparatively low rates for family medicine awards for RT and RCD plausibly contribute to poor federal funding for family medicine research, underscoring the need to bolster the research career pathway in family medicine.

Examining who is conducting and leading National Institute of Health-funded research in U.S. schools of nursing.

BACKGROUND: Nursing science is essential for generating a unique body of knowledge that is foundational to the academic discipline of nursing. PURPOSE: The goal of this analysis is to detail the education and licensing of faculty and leadership in research-intensive schools of nursing and to present the current data on the National Institute of Health (NIH) funding patterns in schools of nursing. METHODS: The faculty composition analysis focused on the 40 U.S. schools of nursing receiving the most NIH funding through faculty serving as PIs on grants awarded in 2023. For the NIH funding patterns analysis, data were extracted from the NIH RePORTER database. DISCUSSION: Of the top 30 NIH-funded Schools of Nursing, all the Deans and Associate Deans of Academic Affairs are educated or licensed as nurses; whereas only 55% of Associate Deans of Research are educated or licensed as nurses. In 2022, nearly half of the top-ranked schools of nursing had less than half of their NIH funding awarded to faculty who are trained and licensed as nurses CONLUSION: The current trends in the research enterprise in schools of nursing implore us to assess if we are adequately training nurses to advance nursing science and more importantly to serve as leaders of nursing science.

Efficacy of Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) grants to build research capacity in underrepresented states.

Federal funding for research has immediate and long-term economic impact. Since federal research funding is regionally concentrated and not geographically distributed, the benefits are not fully realized in some regions of the country. The Established (previously Experimental) Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) programs at several agencies, for example, the National Science Foundation, and the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program at the National Institutes of Health were created to increase competitiveness for funding in states with historically low levels of federal funding. The Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) award program is a component of the IDeA program. The CoBRE grants support research core facilities to develop research infrastructure. These grants also support the research projects of junior investigators, under the guidance of mentoring teams of senior investigators, to develop human resources at these institutions. Few studies have assessed the effectiveness of these programs. This study examines the investment and outcomes of the CoBRE grants from 2000 through 2022. The maturation of junior investigators into independently funded principal investigators is comparable to other mentoring programs supported by NIH. The investment in research cores resulted in substantial research productivity, measured by publications. Despite the successes of individual investigators and increased research infrastructure and productivity, the geographic distribution of federal and NIH research dollars has not changed. These results will be informative in consideration of policies designed to enhance the geographic distribution of federal research dollars.

NIH's flat budget for 2024 will force 'very difficult decisions'.

Belated Senate and House compromise eliminates policy riders restricting certain studies.

Analysis of the health economics portfolio funded by the National Institutes of Health in response to published guidance.

Health services, economics, and outcomes research (referred to as health economics research hereinafter) is one of the interdisciplinary sciences that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports in order to pursue its overall mission to improve health. In 2015, NIH guidance was published to clarify the type of health economics research that NIH would continue to fund. This analysis aimed to determine if there were changes in the number of health economics applications received and funded by NIH after the release of the guidance. Health economics applications submitted to NIH both before and after publication of the guidance were identified using a machine learning approach with input from subject matter experts. Application and funding trends were examined by fiscal year, method of application (solicited vs. unsolicited), and activity code. This study found that application and funding rates of health economics research were decreasing prior to guidance. Following publication of this guidance, the application and funding rate of health economics applications increased.

Trends in NIH-funding to schools of nursing in the last 17 years.

BACKGROUND: Growing clinical demands, faculty retirements, fewer PhD-prepared graduates, and funding instability are challenges for nursing science. PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis was to investigate National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding patterns in schools of nursing (SONs). METHODS: Data were extracted from the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research between 2006 and 2022. Growth modeling examined changes in funding over time between private and public SONs. DISCUSSION: In the last 17 years, NIH funding for SONs has risen nearly 25% but remains only 1% of the total NIH budget for extramural research. Overall, 109 (75%) of the SONs were public and 36 (25%) were private institutions. Regarding geography, 90% of the States received NIH funding except six: ID, ME, MS, NH, VT, and WY. Private SONs consistently received more funding than public SONs but the difference was only statistically significant in 2022. CONCLUSION: NIH funding has significantly increased to SONs, there is better geographic distribution but a funding disparity exists between public and private SONs.

A National Institutes of Health Approach for Advancing Research to Improve Youth Mental Health and Reduce Disparities.

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health challenges were the leading cause of disability and poor health outcomes in youth. Challenges are even greater for youth from racially and ethnically minoritized groups in the United States. Racially and ethnically minoritized youth are more vulnerable to mental health problems than White adolescents, yet are less likely to use mental health services. In late 2021, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored a virtual conference to examine the state of the science around youth mental health disparities (YMHD), focusing on youth from racially and ethnically minoritized populations and the intersection of race and ethnicity with other drivers of mental health disparities. Key findings and feedback gleaned from the conference have informed strategic planning processes related to YMHD, which has included the development of a strategic framework and funding opportunities, designed to reduce YMHD. This commentary briefly describes the collaborative approach used to develop this framework and other strategies implemented across the NIH to address YMHD and serves as an urgent call to action.

Developing the next-generation cancer research workforce in the National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program.

Although the National Institutes of Health is renowned for being the largest funder of biomedical research in the world, the research and associated career development programs on its own campuses are relatively unknown. These intramural programs provide many outstanding and programmatically unique opportunities for research-intensive careers and training in cancer biology, prevention, diagnosis, and therapeutics. Their complementary foci, structures, and review mechanisms make the extramural and intramural cancer research contributions of the National Institutes of Health the perfect partners in the quest to rid the world of cancer as we know it.

The intersection of health and housing: Analysis of the research portfolios of the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

BACKGROUND: Housing is a major social determinant of health that affects health status and outcomes across the lifespan. OBJECTIVES: An interagency portfolio analysis assessed the level of funding invested in "health and housing research" from fiscal years (FY) 2016-2020 across the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to characterize the existing health and housing portfolio and identify potential areas for additional research and collaboration. METHODS/RESULTS: We identified NIH, HUD, and CDC research projects that were relevant to both health and housing and characterized them by housing theme, health topic, population, and study design. We organized the assessment of the individual housing themes by four overarching housing-to-health pathways. From FY 2016-2020, NIH, HUD, and CDC funded 565 health and housing projects combined. The Neighborhood pathway was most common, followed by studies of the Safety and Quality pathway. Studies of the Affordability and Stability pathways were least common. Health topics such as substance use, mental health, and cardiovascular disease were most often studied. Most studies were observational (66%); only a little over one fourth (27%) were intervention studies. DISCUSSION: This review of the research grant portfolios of three major federal funders of health and housing research in the United States describes the diversity and substantial investment in research at the intersection between housing and health. Analysis of the combined portfolio points to gaps in studies on causal pathways linking housing to health outcomes. The findings highlight the need for research to better understand the causal pathways from housing to health and prevention intervention research, including rigorous evaluation of housing interventions and policies to improve health and well-being.

Once reluctant, new NIH chief Monica Bertagnolli embraces role.

Improving patient care is top priority for head of world's largest biomedical research funder.

Funding for Refugee Health Research From the National Institutes of Health Between 2000 and 2020.

Importance: The US has historically resettled more refugees than any other country, with over 3.5 million refugees since 1980. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest public funder of biomedical research and development, but its role in mitigating many health disparities refugees experience through its funded research remains unknown. Objective: To examine the NIH's research funding patterns on refugee health research over the last 2 decades. Design, Setting, and Participants: Secondary analysis of NIH-funded grants between 2000 and 2020 using a cross-sectional study design. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools database was used to find relevant grants. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to September 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: NIH grants awarded by year, state, grant type, research area, funding institute, grant duration, and amount funded. Results: Of 1.7 million NIH grants funded over the 20-year study period, only 78 addressed refugee health. Funded grants were mostly training grants (23 grants [29%]), followed by hypothesis-driven research (R01 grants; 22 grants [28%]), pilot or preliminary investigation proposals (13 grants [17%]), and other types of grants (20 grants [26%]). The most studied research domain was mental health (36 grants [46%]), followed by refugee family dynamics and women's and children's health (14 grants [18%]). A total of 26 grants (33%) were funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and 15 (19%) were funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Most grants were US-based (60 grants [76%]) and the state of Massachusetts received the greatest amount of funding ($14 825 852 [18%]). In 2020, the NIH allocated about $2.3 million to refugee health research, or less than 0.01% of its $42 billion budget that year. The number of grants funded in each time period did not always reflect changes in the number of refugees resettled in the US over the years. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that there remain significant gaps in the understanding of and interventions in the health research needs of refugees locally and along the migratory route. To close these gaps, the NIH should increase its investments in comprehensive studies assessing the physical, mental, and social well-being of this expanding population. This can be achieved by ensuring that all NIH institutes allocate budgets specifically for refugee health research and extend support for the training of refugee researchers.

Mind the NIH-Funding Gap: Structural Discrimination in Physical Health-Related Research for Cognitively Able Autistic Adults.

Autistic adults experience disparities in physical health and health care access. A major barrier to addressing these disparities is a lack of federal funding for research on this topic. In seeking funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), we discovered nodes that contribute to structural discrimination in physical health-related research for autistic adults. To examine this structural discrimination, we systematically searched funded research on all physical health-disparity conditions in autistic adults using NIH RePORTER. Among 61 unique studies, none focused on improving the relevant physical health condition through intervention, programs, or services for autistic adults. Thus, we need updated policies and procedures that support research on physical health disparities in populations with developmental or mental health conditions.

National Institutes of Health grant funding for cerebrovascular diseases.

BACKGROUND: Federal research funding is highly sought after but may be challenging to attain. A clear understanding of funding for specific diseases, such as cerebrovascular disorders, might help researchers regarding which National Institutes of Health (NIH) institutes fund research into specific disorders and grant types. OBJECTIVE: To examine the current scope of NIH grant funding for cerebrovascular conditions. METHODS: The NIH-developed RePORTER was used to extract active NIH-funded studies related to cerebrovascular diseases through January 2023. Duplicate studies were removed, and projects were manually screened and labeled in subcategories as clinical and basic science and as research subcategories. Extracted data included total funding, grant types, institutions that received funding, and diseases studied. Python (version 3.9) and SciPy library were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: We identified 1232 cerebrovascular projects across seven diseases with US$699 952 926 in total funding. The cerebrovascular diseases with the greatest number of grants were ischemic stroke (705, or 57.2% of all funded projects), carotid disease (193, or 15.7%), and hemorrhagic stroke (163, or 13.2%). R01 grants were the most common mechanism of funding (632 grants, or 51.3%). The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) funded the most projects (504 projects; US$325 536 405), followed by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (376 projects; US$216 784 546). CONCLUSION: Cerebrovascular disease receives roughly US$700 million in NIH funding. Ischemic stroke accounts for the majority of NIH-funded cerebrovascular projects, and R01 grants are the most common funding mechanism. Notably, NHLBI provides a large proportion of funding, in addition to NINDS.

Gender as a social and structural variable: research perspectives from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Gender is a social and structural variable that encompasses multiple domains, each of which influences health: gender identity and expression, gender roles and norms, gendered power relations, and gender equality and equity. As such, gender has far-reaching impacts on health. Additional research is needed to continue delineating and untangling the effects of gender from the effects of sex and other biological variables. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) vision for women's health is a world in which the influence of sex and/or gender are integrated into the health research enterprise. However, much of the NIH-supported research on gender and health has, to date, been limited to a small number of conditions (e.g., HIV, mental health, pregnancy) and locations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa; India). Opportunities exist to support transdisciplinary knowledge transfer and interdisciplinary knowledge building by advancing health-related social science research that incorporates best practices from disciplines that have well-established methods, theories, and frameworks for examining the health impacts of gender and other social, cultural, and structural variables.

Gender encompasses multiple domains, each of which influences health: identity and expression; roles and norms; relations; and power. This commentary focuses on gender-related research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH); identifies areas of opportunity for future health research efforts on gender; and articulates a vision for the robust, transdisciplinary incorporation of gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable into the NIH research agenda. The NIH vision for women's health is a world in which the influence of sex and/or gender are integrated into the health research enterprise. However, much of the NIH-supported research on gender and health has, to date, been limited to a small number of conditions (e.g., HIV, mental health, pregnancy) and locations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa; India). Approaching the influences of gender on health with scientific rigor is critical to advancing health research that promotes health equity.