Abstract
ObjectivesDifferences in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding between specialties may affect research and patient outcomes in specialties that are less well funded.The aim of this study is to evaluate how NIH funding has been awarded by medical specialty. This study assesses differences and trends in the amount of funding, by medical specialty, for the years 2011–2020, via a retrospective analysis of data from the NIH RePORTER (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results).Study designLongitudinal cross-sectional studySettingNIH RePORTER data from 2011 to 2020 for awarded NIH grants (F32, T32, K01, K08, K23, R01, R03, R21, U01, P30) in the following medical specialties: anaesthesiology, dermatology, emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, neurology, neurosurgery, obstetrics and gynaecology, ophthalmology, orthopaedic surgery, otolaryngology, pathology, paediatrics, physical medicine and rehabilitation, plastic surgery, psychiatry, radiation-diagnostic/oncology, surgery, and urology.ParticipantsNIH grant awardees for the years 2011-2020InterventionNonePrimary and secondary outcome measuresThe following measures were studied: (1) number of grants by specialty, (2) number of grants per active physician in each specialty, (3) total dollar amount of grants by specialty, (4) total dollar amount of grants per active physician in each specialty and (5) mean dollar amount awarded by specialty for each grant type. We investigated whether any of these measures varied between medical specialties.ResultsIn general, internal medicine/medicine, psychiatry, paediatrics, pathology and neurology received the most grants per year, had the highest number of grants per active physician, had the highest total amount of funding and had the highest amount of funding per active physician, whereas fields like emergency medicine, plastic surgery, orthopaedics, and obstetrics and gynaecology had the lowest. The mean dollar amount awarded by grant type differed significantly between specialties (p value less than the Bonferroni-corrected alpha=0.00029).ConclusionsNIH funding varies significantly between medical specialties. This may affect research progress and the careers of scientists and may affect patient outcomes in less well funded specialties.
Reference11 articles.
1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) . Budget, 2021. Available: https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/budget [Accessed 25 Aug 2021].
2. Atkinson RD . Healthy funding: the critical role of investing in NIH to boost health and lower costs. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, 2019. https://itif.org/publications/2019/03/25/healthy-funding-critical-role-investing-nih-boost-health-and-lower-costs
3. RePORT . RePORTER [Internet]. Reporter.nih.gov, 2021. Available: https://reporter.nih.gov/advanced-search [Accessed 29 Mar 2021].
4. AAMC . 2020 Key Definitions, Commonly Used Acronyms, and Practice Specialties [Internet], 2021. Available: https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/workforce/interactive-data/2020-key-definitions-commonly-used-acronyms-and-practice-specialties [Accessed 17 May 2021].
5. AAMC . Number of People per Active Physician by Specialty, 2019 [Internet], 2021. Available: https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/health-care/workforce-studies/interactive-data/number-people-active-physician-specialty-2019 [Accessed 10 May 2021].