National Institutes of Health Funding for Surgeon-Scientists in the US-An Update and an Expanded Landscape.

Importance: Current reports suggest that the surgeon-scientist phenotype is significantly threatened. However, a significant increase in the proportion of surgeons in the workforce funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from 2010 (0.5%) to 2020 (0.7%) was recently reported and showed that surgeons primarily performed basic science research (78% in 2010; 73% in 2020) rather than clinical research. Objective: To provide an update on the status of surgeons funded by the NIH for fiscal year (FY) 2022. Evidence Review: NIH-funded surgeons were identified in FY2012 and FY2022, including those who were awarded grants with more than 1 principal investigator (PI) by querying the internal database at the NIH. The main outcome for this study was the total number of NIH-funded surgeons in FY2012 and FY2022, including total grant costs and number of grants. The secondary analysis included self-reported demographic characteristics of the surgeons in FY2022. The research type (basic science vs clinical) of R01 grants was also examined. Findings: Including multiple PI grants, 1324 surgeon-scientists were awarded $1.3 billion in FY2022. Women surgeons increased to 31.3% (339 of 1084) of the population of surgeon PIs in FY2022 compared with 21.0% (184 of 876) in FY2012. Among surgeon PIs awarded grants, a total of 200 (22.8%) were Asian, 35 (4.0%) were Black or African American, 18 (2.1%) were another race (including American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and more than 1 race), and 623 (71.1%) were White. A total of 513 of 689 R01 grants (74.5%) were for basic science, 131 (19.0%) were for clinical trials, and 45 (6.5%) were for outcomes research. Conclusions and Relevance: NIH-funded surgeons are increasing in number and grant costs, including the proportion of women surgeon PIs, and are representative of the diversity among US academic surgical faculty. The results of this study suggest that despite the many obstacles surgeon-scientists face, their research portfolio continues to grow, they perform a myriad of mostly basic scientific research as both independent PIs and on multidisciplinary teams.

Current status of National Institutes of Health funding for thoracic surgeons in the United States: Beacon of hope or candle in the wind?

OBJECTIVE: Increasing forces threaten the viability of thoracic surgeon-initiated research, a core component of our academic mission. National Institutes of Health funding is a benchmark of research productivity and innovation. This study examined the current status of National Institutes of Health funding for thoracic surgeons. METHODS: Thoracic surgeon principal investigators on National Institutes of Health-funded grants during June 2010, June 2015, and June 2020 were identified using National Institutes of Health iSearchGrants (version 2.4). American Association of Medical Colleges data were used to identify all surgeons in the United States. Types and total costs of National Institutes of Health-funded grants were compared relative to other surgical specialties. RESULTS: A total of 61 of 4681 (1.3%), 63 of 4484 (1.4%), and 60 of 4497 (1.3%) thoracic surgeons were principal investigators on 79, 76, and 87 National Institutes of Health-funded grants in 2010, 2015, and 2020, respectively; these rates were higher than those for most other surgical specialties (P ≤ .0001). Total National Institutes of Health costs for Thoracic Surgeon-initiated grants increased 57% from 2010 to 2020, outpacing the 33% increase in total National Institutes of Health budget. Numbers and types of grants varied among cardiovascular, transplant, and oncology subgroups. Although the majority of grants and costs were cardiovascular related, increased National Institutes of Health expenditures primarily were due to funding for transplant and oncology grants. Per-capita costs were highest for transplant-related grants during both years. Percentages of R01-to-total costs were constant at 55%. Rates and levels of funding for female versus male thoracic surgeons were comparable. Awards to 5 surgeons accounted for 33% of National Institutes of Health costs for thoracic surgeon principal investigators in 2020; a similar phenomenon was observed for 2010 and 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term structural changes must be implemented to more effectively nurture the next generation of thoracic surgeon scientists.

Endocrine surgery and the surgeon-scientist: Bridging the gap between a rich history and a bright future.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluate National Institutes of Health (NIH) data to describe endocrine surgical research performed by surgeons in the United States. METHODS: An internal NIH database was queried for endocrine surgery-related grants awarded to surgeons in 2010, 2015, and 2020. The grants were then compared based on cost, grant type, research type, and endocrine topic. RESULTS: Eighteen grants ($6.4 M) focused on endocrine surgery-related research topics were identified in 2020, 17 ($7.3 M) in 2015, and 11 ($3.8 M) in 2010. In 2020, 14 grants were basic science and 4 were clinical outcomes, and pancreatic endocrine disease and thyroid disease each comprised 6 grants. R01 and R21 grants comprised 10 (55.6%) of the grants in 2020, compared to 10 (58.5%) in 2015 and 8 (72.7%) in 2010, while K08 and K23 grants increased to 4 (22.2%) in 2020 from 2 (11.8%) in 2015 and none in 2010. CONCLUSION: There were more K-awards focused on endocrine surgery-related research in 2020 compared to 2015 and 2010, suggesting the pipeline is growing.

Current Status of National Institutes of Health Research Funding for Women Surgeon-Scientists.

Importance: Women have made substantial advancements in academic surgery, but research funding disparities continue to hamper their progress, and current literature on the status of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding awarded to women surgeon-scientists appears to be conflicting. Objective: To examine gender-based differences in NIH funding awarded to surgeon-scientists by comparing total grant amounts awarded and the distribution of grants by gender and research type. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was performed using a previously created database of NIH-funded surgeons from 2010 to 2020. Active physician data from the Association of American Medical Colleges were used to calculate total surgeon populations. This study was performed at the NIH using the NIH internal data platform, iSearch Grants. A total of 715 men and women surgeon-scientists funded by the NIH in 2010 and 1031 funded in 2020 were included in the analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the number of women among the total number of surgeons who received NIH grants and the total grant amounts awarded to them. Bivariate χ2 analyses were performed using population totals and substantiated by z tests of population proportions. Results: This study included 715 physicians (n = 579 men [81.0%]) in 2010 and 1031 physicians (n = 769 men [74.6%]) in 2020. In 2020, women comprised 27.4% of the surgical workforce and 25.4% of surgeons with research funding in the US, but they received only 21.7% of total NIH research funding awarded to all surgeons. The number of funded women surgeon-scientists, however, significantly increased from 2010 to 2020 (262 [25.4%] in 2020 vs 136 [19.0%] in 2010; P < .001) as did their funding ($189.7 million [21.7%] in 2020 vs $75.9 million [12.3%] in 2010; P < .001). Furthermore, the proportion of US women surgeons overall with NIH funding significantly increased in 2020 vs 2010 (0.7% vs 0.5%; P < .001). Basic science, clinical outcomes, and clinical trial R01 grants also increased among women surgeon-scientists. Women and men K grant holders had a similar mean (SD) number of R01 application attempts before success (2.7 [3.01] vs 2.3 [3.15]; P = .60) and similar K-to-R award conversion rates (23.5% vs 26.7%; P = .55). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found an increasing number of women surgeon-scientists receiving NIH funding in 2020 vs 2010 as well as increases in the median grant amounts awarded. Although these results are promising, a discrepancy remains in the proportion of women in the surgical workforce compared with those funded by the NIH and the total grant amounts awarded to them.

NIH Funding Across Surgical Specialties; How Do Women Fare?

BACKGROUND: Much has been written about the under-representation of women in academic medicine. However, no study has comprehensively described the gender-based trends of National Institutes of Health funding across surgical specialties; this study provides such an overview. METHODS: We queried a previously created database to identify both male and female National Institutes of Health-funded surgeons. Surgical specialties and subspecialties were determined based upon formal training. Total grant costs and average costs per R01 and K grant were calculated and compared. Bivariate χ2 analyses were performed using population totals. RESULTS: In 2020, the specialties with the highest proportion of National Institutes of Health-funded female surgeon-scientists were obstetrics and gynecology (57%) and vascular surgery (40%). The general surgery subspecialties with the highest proportion of women were breast (85%), endocrine (58%), and colorectal surgery (40%). An analysis of total grant costs in 2020 revealed that in most specialties, the proportion of funding held by women was substantially less than the proportion of women investigators. In obstetrics and gynecology, women comprised 57% of surgeons, but held only 46% of the funding. Similarly, in breast surgery, women comprised 85% of surgeons, but held only 45% of the funding. Women and men had similar changes in the average total cost per R01 and K grant awarded from 2010 to 2020. In 2020, women were awarded less than men per R01 grant in general, otolaryngology, plastic and reconstructive, urology, and vascular surgery. CONCLUSION: Although female surgeon-scientists have made significant advances in some surgical specialties, they continue to lag in others. An in-depth analysis of the factors contributing to these trends is necessary to achieve gender parity across all academic surgical specialties.

An In-Depth Examination of Surgeon-Scientists' NIH-Funded Areas of Research.

Background: Few studies have examined which National Institutes of Health (NIH) Institutes or Centers (ICs) provide most of the funding to surgeons, nor examined the specifics of their research focus areas. A better understanding of both the goals of ICs and research focus areas for surgeons may facilitate further alignment of the two. Methods: A previously created database of NIH-funded surgeons was queried. To understand trends in funding, total grant cost was calculated for each IC in 2010 and 2020, and distribution of IC funds to each principal investigator (PI) category (surgeons, other physicians, and PhDs without a medical degree) was compared. Finally, total cost for Research Condition and Disease Categorization (RCDC) areas funded to surgeons compared to all of NIH was calculated. Statistical analyses were performed; a two-tailed p value of < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) awarded the largest percentage of all 2020 surgeon funding, 34.3% ($298.9M). Compared to the other ICs, surgeons held the largest percentage of the National Eye Institute's (NEI) total funding in 2010 and 2020 at 8.7% and 9.0%, respectively. The RCDC super category comprising the most funding for surgeons was health disparities with 14.5% of all surgeon funding, followed by neurology (13.8%) and cancer (11.4%). Surgeons were awarded 10.8% of NIH's transplant-related research, 7.0% of ophthalmology-related research, and 3.4% of cancer-related research in 2020. Conclusions: Our study shows surgeons have positioned themselves to examine new and myriad research topics while maintaining a focus on health disparities and cancer-related research.

NIH Funding for Surgeon-Scientists in the US: What Is the Current Status?

BACKGROUND: Recent literature suggests that the future of surgeon-scientists in the US has been threatened for the past several decades. However, we documented an overall increase in NIH funding for surgeon-scientists, as well as the number of NIH-funded surgeons, from 2010 to 2020. STUDY DESIGN: NIH-funded principal investigators (PIs) were identified for June 2010 and June 2020 using the NIH internal data platform iSearch Grants (version 2.4). Biographical sketches were searched for key terms to identify surgeon-scientists. Grant research types and total grant costs were collected. American Association of Medical Colleges data were used to determine total surgeon and physician populations. Bivariate chi-square analyses were performed using population totals and were corroborated using z-tests of population proportions using JMP (version 13.0.0). A 2-tailed p value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In June of 2020, a total of 1,031 surgeon-scientists held $872,456,710 in NIH funding. The percentage of funded surgeons significantly increased from 2010 (0.5%) to 2020 (0.7%) (p < 0.05), and the percentage of funded other physicians significantly decreased from 2.2% in 2010 to 1.6% in 2020 (p < 0.05). All surgeons sustained R grant funding at both time points (58% in 2020 and 60% in 2010), and specifically maintained basic science-focused R grants (73% in 2020 and 78% in 2010). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found surgeon-scientists are increasing in number and NIH funding and are becoming more diverse in their research efforts, while maintaining a focus on basic science.