BackgroundAlthough women at all career stages are more likely to leave academia than men, early-career women are a particularly high-risk group. Research supports that women are less likely than men to receive research funding; however, whether funding success rates vary based on research content is unknown. We addressed gender differences in funding success rates for applications directed to one or more of 13 institutes, representing research communities, over a 15-year period.Methods and findingsWe retrospectively reviewed 55,700 grant and 4,087 personnel award applications submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. We analyzed application success rates according to gender and the primary institute selected by applicants, pooled gender differences in success rates using random effects models, and fitted Poisson regression models to assess the effects of gender, time, and institute. We noted variable success rates among grant applications directed to selected institutes and declining success rates over time. Women submitted 31.1% and 44.7% of grant and personnel award applications, respectively. In the pooled estimate, women had significantly lower grant success (risk ratio [RR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.94; p < 0.001; absolute difference 3.2%) compared with men, with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 58%). Compared with men, women who directed grants to the Institutes of Cancer Research (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78–0.96), Circulatory and Respiratory Health (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66–0.84), Health Services and Policy Research (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68–0.90), and Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.93) were significantly less likely to be funded, and those who directed grants to the Institute of Aboriginal People’s Health (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.0–2.7) were more likely to be funded. Overall, women also had significantly lower personnel award success (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65–0.86; p < 0.001; absolute difference 6.6%). Regression modelling identified that the effect of gender on grant success rates differed by institute and not time. Study limitations include use of institutes as a surrogate identifier, variability in designation of primary institute, and lack of access to metrics reflecting applicants, coapplicants, peer reviewers, and the peer-review process.ConclusionsGender disparity existed overall in grant and personnel award success rates, especially for grants directed to selected research communities. Funding agencies should monitor for gender differences in grant success rates overall and by research content.

for the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group IMPORTANCE Although most critically ill patients receive invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), few studies have characterized how IMV is discontinued in practice.OBJECTIVE To describe practice variation in IMV discontinuation internationally, associations between initial discontinuation events and outcomes, and factors associated with the use of select discontinuation strategies and failed initial spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective, multinational, observational study of critically ill adults who received IMV for at least 24 hours from 142 intensive care units (ICUs) in 19 countries within 6 regions (27 in Canada, 23 in India, 22 in the UK, 26 in Europe, 21 in Australia/New Zealand, and 23 in the US). EXPOSURES Receiving IMV. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary analyses characterized types of initial IMV discontinuation events (extubation, SBT, or tracheostomy) and associations with clinical outcomes (including duration of ventilation, ICU and hospital mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay). Secondary analyses examined the associations between SBT outcome and SBT timing and clinical outcomes. RESULTS Among 1868 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 61.8 [48.9-73.1] years; 1173 [62.8%] men) 424 (22.7%) underwent direct extubation, 930 (49.8%) had an initial SBT ( 761[81.8%] successful), 150 (8.0%) underwent direct tracheostomy, and 364 (19.5%) died before a weaning attempt. Across regions, there was variation in the use of written directives to guide care, daily screening, SBT techniques, ventilator modes, and the roles played by clinicians involved in weaning. Compared with initial direct extubation, patients who had an initial SBT had higher ICU mortality (20 [4.7%] vs 96 [10.3%]; absolute difference, 5.6% [95% CI, 2.6%-8.6%]), longer duration of ventilation (median of 2.9 vs 4.1 days; absolute difference, 1.2 days [95% CI, 0.7-1.6]), and longer ICU stay (median of 6.7 vs 8.1 days; absolute difference, 1.4 days [95% CI, 0.8-2.4]). Patients whose initial SBT failed (vs passed) had higher ICU mortality (29 [17.2%] vs 67 [8.8%]; absolute difference, 8.4% [95% CI, 2.0%-14.7%]), longer duration of ventilation (median of 6.1 vs 3.5 days; absolute difference, 2.6 days [95% CI, 1.6-3.6]), and longer ICU stay (median of 10.6 vs 7.7 days; absolute difference, 2.8 days [95% CI, 1.1-5.2]). Compared with patients who underwent early initial SBTs, patients who underwent late initial SBTs (>2.3 days after intubation) had longer duration of ventilation (median of 2.1 vs 6.1 days; absolute difference, 4.0 days [95% CI, 3.7-4.5]), longer ICU stay (median of 5.9 vs 10.8 days; absolute difference, 4.9 days [95% CI, 4.0-6.3]), and longer hospital stay (median of 14.3 vs 22.8 days; absolute difference, 8.5 days [95% CI, 6.0-11.0]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this observational study of invasive mechanical ventilation discontinuation in 142 ICUs in Canada, India, the UK, Europe, Australia/New Zealand, and the US from 2013 to 2016...

Our findings document the presence and extent of practice variation in ventilator weaning on an international scale, and highlight the multidisciplinary and collaborative nature of weaning.

Whereas research personnel and administrators support participation in pandemic ICU research, several modifiable barriers to participation exist. Pandemic research preparedness planning with regulatory bodies and dedicated funding to support research infrastructure, especially in community settings, are required to optimize future pandemic research participation.