Shah Anand, Pietrobon Ricardo, Cook Chad, Sheth Neil P, Nguyen Lam, Guo Lucie, Jacobs Danny O, Kuo Paul C
Department of Surgery, Center for Excellence in Surgical Outcomes, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.
Ann Surg. 2007 Dec;246(6):1110-5. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3180f633f6.
To evaluate National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for academic surgery departments and to determine whether optimal portfolio strategies exist to maximize this funding.
The NIH budget is expected to be relatively stable in the foreseeable future, with a modest 0.7% increase from 2005 to 2006. Funding for basic and clinical science research in surgery is also not expected to increase.
NIH funding award data for US surgery departments from 2002 to 2004 was collected using publicly available data abstracted from the NIH Information for Management, Planning, Analysis, and Coordination (IMPAC) II database. Additional information was collected from the Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects (CRISP) database regarding research area (basic vs. clinical, animal vs. human, classification of clinical and basic sciences). The primary outcome measures were total NIH award amount, number of awards, and type of grant. Statistical analysis was based on binomial proportional tests and multiple linear regression models.
The smallest total NIH funding award in 2004 to an individual surgery department was a single $26,970 grant, whereas the largest was more than $35 million comprising 68 grants. From 2002 to 2004, one department experienced a 336% increase (greatest increase) in funding, whereas another experienced a 73% decrease (greatest decrease). No statistically significant differences were found between departments with decreasing or increasing funding and the subspecialty of basic science or clinical research funded. Departments (n = 5) experiencing the most drastic decrease (total dollars) in funding had a significantly higher proportion of type K (P = 0.03) grants compared with departments (n = 5) with the largest increases in total funding; the latter group had a significantly increased proportion of type U grants (P = 0.01). A linear association between amount of decrease/increase was found with the average amount of funding per grant and per investigator (P < 0.01), suggesting that departments that increased their total funding relied on investigators with large amounts of funding per grant.
Although incentives to junior investigators and clinicians with secondary participation in research are important, our findings suggest that the best strategy for increasing NIH funding for surgery departments is to invest in individuals with focused research commitments and established track records of garnering large and multiple research grants.
评估美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)对学术外科部门的资金投入,并确定是否存在优化资金组合策略以实现资金最大化。
预计在可预见的未来,NIH预算将相对稳定,2005年至2006年将有适度的0.7%增长。外科基础和临床科学研究的资金预计也不会增加。
使用从NIH管理、规划、分析和协调信息(IMPAC)II数据库中提取的公开数据,收集2002年至2004年美国外科部门的NIH资金奖励数据。从科学项目信息计算机检索(CRISP)数据库中收集有关研究领域(基础与临床、动物与人类、临床和基础科学分类)的其他信息。主要观察指标为NIH奖励总额、奖励数量和资助类型。统计分析基于二项比例检验和多元线性回归模型。
2004年单个外科部门获得的NIH资金奖励总额最小为一笔26,970美元的资助,而最大的超过3500万美元,包括68笔资助。从2002年到2004年,一个部门的资金增长了336%(增长幅度最大),而另一个部门则下降了73%(下降幅度最大)。资金减少或增加的部门与所资助的基础科学或临床研究亚专业之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。资金减少幅度最大(总金额)的部门(n = 5)与资金增加幅度最大的部门(n = 5)相比,K类资助的比例显著更高(P = 0.03);后一组U类资助的比例显著增加(P = 0.01)。发现资助减少/增加幅度与每项资助和每位研究人员的平均资金量之间存在线性关联(P < 0.01),这表明总资金增加的部门依赖于每项资助获得大量资金的研究人员。
虽然激励初级研究人员和参与研究的临床医生很重要,但我们的研究结果表明,增加NIH对外科部门资金投入的最佳策略是投资于研究方向明确且有获得大量和多项研究资助记录的个人。