Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19001306›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine

Off the roadmap? Family medicine's grant funding and committee representation at NIH.

Sean C Lucan, Robert L Phillips, Andrew W Bazemore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Power of Primary Care to Improve Health.Annals of family medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. The Power of Primary Care to Improve Health.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mediators of Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Mentored K Award Receipt Among U.S. Medical School Graduates.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Gender Disparities in Academic Practice.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2015
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sean C LucanRobert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104-6021, USA. sean.lucan@uphs.upenn.edu
Robert L Phillips
Andrew W Bazemore

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFamily medicine is challenged to develop its own research infrastructure and to inform and contribute to a national translational-research agenda. Toward these ends, understanding family medicine's engagement with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is important.

methodsWe descriptively analyzed NIH grants to family medicine from 2002 through 2006 and the current NIH advisory committee memberships.

resultsGrants (and dollars) awarded to departments of family medicine increased from 89 ($25.6 million) in 2002, to 154 ($44.6 million) in 2006. These values represented only 0.20% (0.15% for dollars) and 0.33% (0.22% for dollars), respectively, of total NIH awards. Nearly 75% of family medicine grants came from just 6 of NIH's grant-funding 24 institutes and centers. Although having disproportionately fewer grant continuations (62% vs 72%) and R awards (68% vs 74%)-particularly R01 awards (53% vs 84%)-relative to NIH grantees overall, family medicine earned proportionately more new (28% vs 21%) and K awards (25% vs 9%) and had more physician principal investigators (52% vs 15%). Ten of the nation's 132 departments of family medicine (7.6%) earned almost 50% of all family medicine awards. Representatives from family medicine were on 6.4% of NIH advisory committees (0.38% of all members); family physicians were on 2.7% (0.16% of members).

conclusionsDepartments of family medicine, and family physicians in particular, receive a miniscule proportion of NIH grant funding and have correspondingly minimal representation on standing NIH advisory committees. Family medicine's engagement at the NIH remains near well-documented historic lows, undermining family medicine's potential for translating medical knowledge into community practice, and advancing knowledge to improve health care and health for the US population as a whole.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCross-Sectional StudiesFamily PracticeFinancing, GovernmentHumansNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)United States

Identifiers

PMID19001306
PMCPMC2582465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.