Citation Impact of NHLBI R01 Grants Funded Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as Compared to R01 Grants Funded Through a Standard Payline

Author:

Danthi Narasimhan S.1,Wu Colin O.1,DiMichele Donna M.1,Hoots W. Keith1,Lauer Michael S.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences (N.S.D., C.O.W., M.S.L.) and Division of Blood Diseases and Disorders (D.M.D., W.K.H.), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (NHLBI), Bethesda, MD.

Abstract

Rationale: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allowed National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to fund R01 grants that fared less well on peer review than those funded by meeting a payline threshold. It is not clear whether the sudden availability of additional funding enabled research of similar or lesser citation impact than already funded work. Objective: To compare the citation impact of ARRA-funded de novo National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R01 grants with concurrent de novo National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R01 grants funded by standard payline mechanisms. Methods and Results: We identified de novo (type 1) R01 grants funded by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in fiscal year 2009: these included 458 funded by meeting Institute’s published payline and 165 funded only because of ARRA funding. Compared with payline grants, ARRA grants received fewer total funds (median values, $1.03 versus $1.87 million; P <0.001) for a shorter duration (median values including no-cost extensions, 3.0 versus 4.9 years; P <0.001). Through May 2014, the payline R01 grants generated 3895 publications, whereas the ARRA R01 grants generated 996. Using the InCites database from Thomson-Reuters, we calculated a normalized citation impact for each grant by weighting each article for the number of citations it received normalizing for subject, article type, and year of publication. The ARRA R01 grants had a similar normalized citation impact per $1 million spent as the payline grants (median values [interquartile range], 2.15 [0.73–4.68] versus 2.03 [0.75–4.10]; P =0.61). The similar impact of the ARRA grants persisted even after accounting for potential confounders. Conclusions: Despite shorter durations and lower budgets, ARRA R01 grants had comparable citation outcomes per $million spent to that of contemporaneously funded payline R01 grants.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Physiology

Reference11 articles.

1. Biomedical Research in an Age of Austerity

2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: 1 Year Later

3. Park H Lee J Kim B. Less bang for the buck? A natural experiment in NIH funding [Internet]. 2014. Available at: http://www.econ.gatech.edu/files/papers/NIHARRA_RP.pdf. Accessed December 17 2014.

4. How good is research really?

5. Prior Publication Productivity, Grant Percentile Ranking, and Topic-Normalized Citation Impact of NHLBI Cardiovascular R01 Grants

Cited by 16 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3