• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

日本公共资金在产生生命科学和医学新兴课题方面的有效性。

The effectiveness of Japanese public funding to generate emerging topics in life science and medicine.

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.

College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 17;18(8):e0290077. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290077. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0290077
PMID:37590186
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10434904/
Abstract

Understanding the effectiveness of public funds to generate emerging topics will assist policy makers in promoting innovation. In the present study, we aim to clarify the effectiveness of grants to generate emerging topics in life sciences and medicine since 1991 with regard to Japanese researcher productivity and grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. To clarify how large grant amounts and which categories are more effective in generating emerging topics from both the PI and investment perspectives, we analyzed awarded PI publications containing emerging keywords (EKs; the elements of emerging topics) before and after funding. Our results demonstrated that, in terms of grant amounts, while PIs tended to generate more EKs with larger grants, the most effective investment from the perspective of investor side was found in the smallest amount range for each PI (less than 5 million JPY /year). Second, in terms of grant categories, we found that grant categories providing smaller amounts for diverse researchers without excellent past performance records were more effective from the investment perspective to generate EK. Our results suggest that offering smaller, widely dispersed grants rather than large, concentrated grants is more effective in promoting the generation of emerging topics in life science and medicine.

摘要

了解公共资金在产生新兴课题方面的效果,将有助于政策制定者推动创新。本研究旨在阐明自 1991 年以来,日本学术振兴会资助对日本生命科学和医学领域研究人员生产力和资助的影响,以明确资助在产生新兴课题方面的效果。为了从研究人员和投资方的角度明确大额资助和哪些类别更有利于产生新兴课题,我们分析了获得资助前后包含新兴关键词(新兴课题的要素)的获奖研究人员的出版物。结果表明,就资助金额而言,虽然研究人员获得的资助金额越大,产生的新兴关键词越多,但从投资方的角度来看,每个研究人员获得的最小资助金额范围内(每年少于 500 万日元)的投资效果最佳。其次,就资助类别而言,我们发现,对于没有出色过往业绩记录的多样化研究人员提供小额资助的类别,从投资角度来看,更有利于产生新兴关键词。研究结果表明,在生命科学和医学领域,提供小额、广泛分散的资助比提供大额、集中的资助更有利于促进新兴课题的产生。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/7088cc77687d/pone.0290077.g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/f42d4f74397f/pone.0290077.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/bb28fb2407a6/pone.0290077.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/cc9d7c8e3d89/pone.0290077.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/b567aaf4f673/pone.0290077.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/05b79c29d6d9/pone.0290077.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/c2cae70376ef/pone.0290077.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/7088cc77687d/pone.0290077.g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/f42d4f74397f/pone.0290077.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/bb28fb2407a6/pone.0290077.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/cc9d7c8e3d89/pone.0290077.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/b567aaf4f673/pone.0290077.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/05b79c29d6d9/pone.0290077.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/c2cae70376ef/pone.0290077.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b4a8/10434904/7088cc77687d/pone.0290077.g008.jpg

相似文献

1
The effectiveness of Japanese public funding to generate emerging topics in life science and medicine.日本公共资金在产生生命科学和医学新兴课题方面的有效性。
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 17;18(8):e0290077. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290077. eCollection 2023.
2
Comparing National Institutes of Health funding of emergency medicine to four medical specialties.比较美国国立卫生研究院对急诊医学与四个医学专业的资助。
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Sep;18(9):1001-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01138.x. Epub 2011 Aug 19.
3
Gender differences in funding among grant recipients in emergency medicine: A multicenter analysis.在急诊医学领域,资助获得者中的性别差异:一项多中心分析。
Am J Emerg Med. 2020 Jul;38(7):1357-1361. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.11.006. Epub 2019 Nov 18.
4
Impact of research investment on scientific productivity of junior researchers.研究投入对初级研究人员科研生产力的影响。
Transl Behav Med. 2016 Dec;6(4):659-668. doi: 10.1007/s13142-015-0361-9.
5
Characteristics and Outcomes of Research Funded by the American Head and Neck Society Foundation.美国头颈部协会基金会资助的研究的特点和结果。
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Dec 1;146(12):1120-1124. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.3054.
6
Government funding of cancer research in Brazil.巴西政府对癌症研究的资助。
J Cancer Policy. 2021 Dec;30:100302. doi: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2021.100302. Epub 2021 Aug 21.
7
Patterns of National Institutes of Health Grant Funding to Surgical Research and Scholarly Productivity in the United States.美国国立卫生研究院资助的外科研究和学术成果模式。
Ann Surg. 2020 Oct;272(4):539-546. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004206.
8
Big Science vs. Little Science: How Scientific Impact Scales with Funding.大科学与小科学:科学影响力如何随资金投入而变化
PLoS One. 2013 Jun 19;8(6):e65263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065263. Print 2013.
9
Systematic analysis of global health research funding in Canada, 2000-2016.2000-2016 年加拿大全球健康研究资金的系统分析。
Can J Public Health. 2020 Feb;111(1):80-95. doi: 10.17269/s41997-019-00247-8. Epub 2019 Nov 6.
10
The Relationship Between OREF Grants and Future NIH Funding Success.骨科研究与教育基金会(OREF)资助与未来美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)资助成功之间的关系。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Aug 16;99(16):e87. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01278.

引用本文的文献

1
Collective predictive coding as model of science: formalizing scientific activities towards generative science.作为科学模型的集体预测编码:将科学活动形式化以实现生成性科学。
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Jun 4;12(6):241678. doi: 10.1098/rsos.241678. eCollection 2025 Jun.

本文引用的文献

1
Europe's premier funding agency measures its impact.欧洲首要的资助机构衡量其影响力。
Nature. 2016 Jul 28;535(7613):477-8. doi: 10.1038/535477a.
2
Size, Accumulation and Performance for Research Grants: Examining the Role of Size for Centres of Excellence.研究资助的规模、积累与绩效:审视规模对卓越中心的作用。
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 10;11(2):e0147726. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147726. eCollection 2016.
3
Maximizing the return on taxpayers' investments in fundamental biomedical research.最大化纳税人在基础生物医学研究方面投资的回报。
Mol Biol Cell. 2015 May 1;26(9):1578-82. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E14-06-1163.
4
Atypical combinations and scientific impact.非典型组合和科学影响。
Science. 2013 Oct 25;342(6157):468-72. doi: 10.1126/science.1240474.
5
Big Science vs. Little Science: How Scientific Impact Scales with Funding.大科学与小科学:科学影响力如何随资金投入而变化
PLoS One. 2013 Jun 19;8(6):e65263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065263. Print 2013.
6
Science policy: Well-funded investigators should receive extra scrutiny.科学政策:资金充足的研究人员应接受额外审查。
Nature. 2012 Sep 13;489(7415):203. doi: 10.1038/489203a.
7
The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity.研究资助资金对科研生产力的影响。
J Public Econ. 2011 Oct 1;95(9-10):1168-1177. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.005.
8
Study says middle sized labs do best.研究表明中型实验室表现最佳。
Nature. 2010 Nov 18;468(7322):356-7. doi: 10.1038/468356a.
9
"Big" versus "little" science: comparative analysis of program projects and individual research grants.
Am J Ment Retard. 1997 Nov;102(3):211-27. doi: 10.1352/0895-8017(1997)102<0211:BVLSCA>2.0.CO;2.
10
Understanding and using the medical subject headings (MeSH) vocabulary to perform literature searches.理解并使用医学主题词表(MeSH)词汇进行文献检索。
JAMA. 1994 Apr 13;271(14):1103-8.