The increasing importance of fellowships and career development awards in the careers of early-stage biomedical academic researchers


Autoři: Christopher L. Pickett aff001
Působiště autorů: Rescuing Biomedical Research, Lewis-Sigler Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, United States of America aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223876

Souhrn

Excessive competition for biomedical faculty positions has ratcheted up the need to accumulate some mix of high-quality publications and prestigious grants to move from a training position to university faculty. How universities value each of these attributes when considering faculty candidates is critical for understanding what is needed to succeed as academic faculty. In this study, I analyzed publicly available NIH grant information to determine the grants first-time R01 (FTR01) awardees held during their training period. Increases in the percentage of the FTR01 population that held a training award demonstrate these awards are becoming a more common component of a faculty candidate’s resume. The increase was largely due to an expansion of NIH K-series career development awards between 2000 and 2017. FTR01 awardees with a K01, K08, K23, or K99 award were overrepresented in a subset of institutions, whereas FTR01 awardees with F32 fellowships and those with no training award were evenly distributed across institutions. Finally, training awardees from the largest institutions were overrepresented in the faculty of the majority of institutions, echoing data from other fields where a select few institutions supply an overwhelming majority of the faculty for the rest of the field. These data give important insight into how trainees compete for NIH funding and faculty positions and how institutions prefer those with or without training awards.

Klíčová slova:

Careers – Careers in research – Graduates – Health services research – Institutional funding of science – Medical education – Research grants – Trainees


Zdroje

1. Alberts B, Kirschner MW, Tilghman S, Varmus H. Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(16):5773–7. Epub 2014/04/16. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1404402111 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4000813.

2. Daniels RJ. A generation at risk: young investigators and the future of the biomedical workforce. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(2):313–8. Epub 2015/01/07. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1418761112 25561560; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4299207.

3. McDowell GS, Gunsalus KT, MacKellar DC, Mazzilli SA, Pai VP, Goodwin PR, et al. Shaping the Future of Research: a perspective from junior scientists. F1000Res. 2014;3:291. Epub 2015/02/06. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.5878.2 25653845; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4304227.

4. Pickett CL, Corb BW, Matthews CR, Sundquist WI, Berg JM. Toward a sustainable biomedical research enterprise: Finding consensus and implementing recommendations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(35):10832–6. Epub 2015/07/22. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1509901112 26195768; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4568264.

5. BEST. NIH Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training 2019. Available from: http://www.nihbest.org/.

6. Blank R, Daniels RJ, Gilliland G, Gutmann A, Hawgood S, Hrabowski FA, et al. A new data effort to inform career choices in biomedicine. Science. 2017;358(6369):1388–9. Epub 2017/12/16. doi: 10.1126/science.aar4638 29242335.

7. Xu H, Gilliam RST, Peddada SD, Buchold GM, Collins TRL. Visualizing detailed postdoctoral employment trends using a new career outcome taxonomy. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36(2):197–202. Epub 2018/01/16. doi: 10.1038/nbt.4059 29334368; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5872819.

8. Pickett CL, Tilghman S. Becoming more transparent: Collecting and presenting data on biomedical Ph.D. alumni. PeerJ Preprints. 2018. doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.3370v2

9. Pickett CL, Bankston A, McDowell GS. The GSS is an unreliable indicator of biological sciences postdoc population trends. bioRxiv. 2017. Epub Dec. 1, 2017. doi.org/10.1101/171314

10. Sauermann H, Roach M. SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE. Why pursue the postdoc path? Science. 2016;352(6286):663–4. Epub 2016/05/07. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf2061 27151854.

11. Heggeness ML, Gunsalus KT, Pacas J, McDowell G. The new face of US science. Nature. 2017;541(7635):21–3. Epub 2017/01/06. doi: 10.1038/541021a 28054625.

12. Heggeness ML, Ginther DK, Larenas MI, Carter-Johnson FD. The Impact of Postdoctoral Fellowships on a Future Independent Career in Federally Funded Biomedical Research. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series. 2018;No. 24508. doi: 10.3386/w24508

13. van Dijk D, Manor O, Carey LB. Publication metrics and success on the academic job market. Curr Biol. 2014;24(11):R516–7. Epub 2014/06/04. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.04.039 24892909.

14. Nikaj S, Lund PK. The Impact of Individual Mentored Career Development (K) Awards on the Research Trajectories of Early-Career Scientists. Acad Med. 2018. Epub 2018/12/07. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002543 30520806.

15. Kahn S, Ginther DK. The impact of postdoctoral training on early careers in biomedicine. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35(1):90–4. Epub 2017/01/11. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3766 28072769.

16. NIH. Types of Grant Programs 2019. Available from: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/funding_program.htm.

17. Mantovani R, Look MV, Wuerker E. The Career Achievements of National Research Service Award Postdoctoral Trainees and Fellows: 1975–2004. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, 2006.

18. Michie J, Zhang X, Wells J, Ristow L, Pion G, Miyaoka A, et al. Feasibility, Design and Planning Study for Evaluating the NIH Career Development Awards. Rockville, MD: National Institutes of Health, 2007.

19. Alberts B, Hyman T, Pickett CL, Tilghman S, Varmus H. Improving support for young biomedical scientists. Science. 2018;360(6390):716–8. Epub 2018/05/19. doi: 10.1126/science.aar8405 29773737.

20. Lauer M, Tabak L, Collins F. Opinion: The Next Generation Researchers Initiative at NIH. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(45):11801–3. Epub 2017/11/09. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1716941114 29114085; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5692611.

21. Pickett CL. "Bias in distribution of K99 awards and faculty hires" Rescuing Biomedical Research. 2017. Available from: http://rescuingbiomedicalresearch.org/blog/bias-distribution-k99-awards-faculty-hires/.

22. Conte ML, Omary MB. NIH Career Development Awards: conversion to research grants and regional distribution. J Clin Invest. 2018;128(12):5187–90. Epub 2018/10/30. doi: 10.1172/JCI123875 30371504; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6264617.

23. NIH. Early Stage Investigator Policies 2019. Available from: https://grants.nih.gov/policy/early-investigators/index.htm.

24. Stephan P. How Economics Shapes Science: Harvard University Press; 2012.

25. Berg JM. "My first pass evaluation of the K99-R00 program" Datahound. 2014. Available from: https://datahound.scientopia.org/2014/07/17/my-first-pass-evaluation-of-the-k99-r00-program/.

26. Pickett CL. "Examining the distribution of K99/R00 awards by race" Rescuing Biomedical Research. 2018. Available from: http://rescuingbiomedicalresearch.org/blog/examining-distribution-k99r00-awards-race/.

27. Katz Y, Matter U. On the Biomedical Elite: Inequality and Stasis in Scientific Knowledge Production. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Publication. 2017.

28. Wahls WP. Biases in grant proposal success rates, funding rates and award sizes affect the geographical distribution of funding for biomedical research. PeerJ. 2016;4:e1917. Epub 2016/04/15. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1917 27077009; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4830231.

29. Clauset A, Arbesman S, Larremore DB. Systematic inequality and hierarchy in faculty hiring networks. Sci Adv. 2015;1(1):e1400005. Epub 2015/11/26. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1400005 26601125; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4644075.


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 10