Size and characteristics of the biomedical research workforce associated with U.S. National Institutes of Health extramural grants.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) annually invests approximately $22 billion in biomedical research through its extramural grant programs. Since fiscal year (FY) 2010, all persons involved in research during the previous project year have been required to be listed on the annual grant progress report. These new data have enabled the production of the first-ever census of the NIH-funded extramural research workforce. Data were extracted from All Personnel Reports submitted for NIH grants funded in FY 2009, including position title, months of effort, academic degrees obtained, and personal identifiers. Data were de-duplicated to determine a unique person count. Person-years of effort (PYE) on NIH grants were computed. In FY 2009, NIH funded 50,885 grant projects, which created 313,049 full- and part-time positions spanning all job functions involved in biomedical research. These positions were staffed by 247,457 people at 2,604 institutions. These persons devoted 121,465 PYE to NIH grant-supported research. Research project grants each supported 6 full- or part-time positions, on average. Over 20% of positions were occupied by postdoctoral researchers and graduate and undergraduate students. These baseline data were used to project workforce estimates for FYs 2010-2014 and will serve as a foundation for future research.

Eliminating health disparities through transdisciplinary research, cross-agency collaboration, and public participation.

Despite efforts to the contrary, disparities in health and health care persist in the United States. To solve this problem, federal agencies representing different disciplines and perspectives are collaborating on a variety of transdisciplinary research initiatives. The most recent of these initiatives was launched in 2006 when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Office of Public Health Research and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health brought together federal partners representing a variety of disciplines to form the Federal Collaboration on Health Disparities Research (FCHDR). FCHDR collaborates with a wide variety of federal and nonfederal partners to support and disseminate research that aims to reduce or eliminate disparities in health and health care. Given the complexity involved in eliminating health disparities, there is a need for more transdisciplinary, collaborative research, and facilitating that research is FCHDR's mission.

How Criterion Scores Predict the Overall Impact Score and Funding Outcomes for National Institutes of Health Peer-Reviewed Applications.

Understanding the factors associated with successful funding outcomes of research project grant (R01) applications is critical for the biomedical research community. R01 applications are evaluated through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) peer review system, where peer reviewers are asked to evaluate and assign scores to five research criteria when assessing an application's scientific and technical merit. This study examined the relationship of the five research criterion scores to the Overall Impact score and the likelihood of being funded for over 123,700 competing R01 applications for fiscal years 2010 through 2013. The relationships of other application and applicant characteristics, including demographics, to scoring and funding outcomes were studied as well. The analyses showed that the Approach and, to a lesser extent, the Significance criterion scores were the main predictors of an R01 application's Overall Impact score and its likelihood of being funded. Applicants might consider these findings when submitting future R01 applications to NIH.

Sex differences in application, success, and funding rates for NIH extramural programs.

PURPOSE: The authors provide an analysis of sex differences in National Institutes of Health (NIH) award programs to inform potential initiatives for promoting diversity in the research workforce. METHOD: In 2010, the authors retrieved data for NIH extramural grants in the electronic Research Administration Information for Management, Planning, and Coordination II database and used statistical analysis to determine any sex differences in securing NIH funding, as well as subsequent success of researchers who had already received independent NIH support. RESULTS: Success and funding rates for men and women were not significantly different in most award programs. Furthermore, in programs where participation was lower for women than men, the disparity was primarily related to a lower percentage of women applicants compared with men, rather than decreased success rates or funding rates. However, for subsequent grants, both application and funding rates were generally higher for men than for women. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectional analysis showed that women and men were generally equally successful at all career stages, but longitudinal analysis showed that men with previous experience as NIH grantees had higher application and funding rates than women at similar career points. On average, although women received larger R01 awards than men, men had more R01 awards than women at all points in their careers. Therefore, while greater participation of women in NIH programs is under way, further action will be required to eradicate remaining sex differences.