Disparities in National Institute of Health trauma research funding

Dowd, Brianna; McKenney, Mark; Boneva, Dessy; Elkbuli, Adel

doi:10.1097/md.0000000000019027

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another hypothesis may be a decreasing interest of urologists for renal trauma care with the increasing role of nonoperative management. Finally, the lack of funding for trauma research and lack of interest of many international peer-reviewed urology journals for renal trauma may slow down the spread and permeation of evidence in the urologic community [21] , [22] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Hospital Volume on the Outcomes of Renal Trauma Management

Baloche

Szabla

Freton

et al. 2022

European Urology Open Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Hospital Volume on the Outcomes of Renal Trauma Management

Baloche

Szabla

Freton

et al. 2022

European Urology Open Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Questions from Round 0 were compiled by the investigator team and loaded into Surveylet for Round 1, during which participants were asked to rate the priority of each research question on a 9-point Likert scale (1, low priority; 9, high priority). In Rounds 2 and 3, participants received numerical and graphical feedback based on the aggregated responses of other survey participants and could change their ratings in an effort to reach consensus regarding each question's priority as low, 1-3 medium, [4][5][6] or high. [7][8][9] Questions that reached consensus, defined as 60% agreement, were removed from subsequent rounds.…”

Section: Internet-based Delphi Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparatively, the National Institutes of Health spent an estimated $6.3 billion on cancer research in the same year. 4 Pediatric trauma, in particular, remains underfunded at the federal level. For example, a recent study indicated that firearm injury, the second leading cause of death among children and adolescents, received $597 per death in research grants.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this health care burden, less than 2% of the 2018 National Institutes of Health budget was designated for traumatic injury research projects spanning all age groups (an estimated $639 million). Comparatively, the National Institutes of Health spent an estimated $6.3 billion on cancer research in the same year 4 . Pediatric trauma, in particular, remains underfunded at the federal level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the Pediatric Research Gap Delphi Survey

Groner

Phuong²,

Price³

et al. 2022

J Trauma Acute Care Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:In 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine trauma report recommended a National Trauma Research Action Plan to "strengthen trauma research and ensure that the resources available for this research are commensurate with the importance of injury and the potential for improvement in patient outcomes." With a contract from the Department of Defense, the Coalition for National Trauma Research created 11 expert panels to address this recommendation, with the goal of developing a comprehensive research agenda, spanning the continuum of trauma and burn care. This report outlines the work of the group focused on pediatric trauma. METHODS:Experts in pediatric trauma clinical care and research were recruited to identify gaps in current clinical pediatric trauma research, generate research questions, and establish the priority of these questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. Using successive surveys, participants were asked to rank the priority of each research question on a 9-point Likert scale categorized to represent priority. Consensus was defined as >60% agreement within the priority category. Priority questions were coded based on a dictionary of 118 National Trauma Research Action Plan taxonomy concepts in 9 categories to support comparative analysis across all panels. RESULTS:Thirty-seven subject matter experts generated 625 questions. A total of 493 questions (79%) reached consensus on priority level. Of those reaching consensus, 159 (32%) were high, 325 (66%) were medium, and 9 (2%) were low priority. The highest priority research questions related to surgical interventions for traumatic brain injury (intracranial pressure monitoring and craniotomy); the second highest priority was hemorrhagic shock. The prehospital setting was the highest priority phase of care. CONCLUSION:This diverse panel of experts determined that most significant pediatric trauma research gaps were in traumatic brain injury, hemorrhagic shock, and the prehospital phase of care. These research domains should be top priorities for funding agencies.

show abstract

“…By way of example, a recent study by Dowd et al found that the National Institute of General Medical Science (NIGMS) provided the largest funding to trauma research. The authors concluded that an established and well-funded institute offers more resources that could be utilized by PIs pursuing trauma research compared to starting a new, smaller institute solely focused in this area [ 4 ]. Furthermore, implemented in 2008 at the request of Congress to address a more transparent method of reporting the relationship between NIH’s research portfolio and public health needs, Research Condition and Disease Categorization (RCDC) was created.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An In-Depth Examination of Surgeon-Scientists’ NIH-Funded Areas of Research

Demblowski¹,

Blakely²,

Zeiger³

2022

J Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Few studies have examined which National Institutes of Health (NIH) Institutes or Centers (ICs) provide most of the funding to surgeons, nor examined the specifics of their research focus areas. A better understanding of both the goals of ICs and research focus areas for surgeons may facilitate further alignment of the two. Methods: A previously created database of NIH-funded surgeons was queried. To understand trends in funding, total grant cost was calculated for each IC in 2010 and 2020, and distribution of IC funds to each principal investigator (PI) category (surgeons, other physicians, and PhDs without a medical degree) was compared. Finally, total cost for Research Condition and Disease Categorization (RCDC) areas funded to surgeons compared to all of NIH was calculated. Statistical analyses were performed; a two-tailed p value of < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) awarded the largest percentage of all 2020 surgeon funding, 34.3% ($298.9M). Compared to the other ICs, surgeons held the largest percentage of the National Eye Institute’s (NEI) total funding in 2010 and 2020 at 8.7% and 9.0%, respectively. The RCDC super category comprising the most funding for surgeons was health disparities with 14.5% of all surgeon funding, followed by neurology (13.8%) and cancer (11.4%). Surgeons were awarded 10.8% of NIH’s transplant-related research, 7.0% of ophthalmology-related research, and 3.4% of cancer-related research in 2020. Conclusions: Our study shows surgeons have positioned themselves to examine new and myriad research topics while maintaining a focus on health disparities and cancer-related research.

show abstract

Disparities in National Institute of Health trauma research funding

Cited by 11 publications

References 3 publications

Impact of Hospital Volume on the Outcomes of Renal Trauma Management

Impact of Hospital Volume on the Outcomes of Renal Trauma Management

Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan: Results from the Pediatric Research Gap Delphi Survey

An In-Depth Examination of Surgeon-Scientists’ NIH-Funded Areas of Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About