ArticleClinical and translational science2015
NIH grant awards as a metric of clinical and translational research training effectiveness.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the mHealth Nexus: A Semantic Analysis of mHealth Scholars' Research Propensities Following an Interdisciplinary Training Institute.Applied sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prioritising and incentivising productivity within indicator-based approaches to Research Impact Assessment: a commentary.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- A Bibliometric Measure of Translational Science.Scientometrics · 2020Article
- Improving clinical and translational research training: a qualitative evaluation of the Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute KL2-mentored research scholars program.Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2017Article
- Teaching Translational Research to Medical Students: The New York University School of Medicine's Master's of Science in Clinical Investigation Dual-Degree Program.Clinical and translational science · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The number of clinical research training programs has increased over the past 5-10 years, but few studies have quantitatively evaluated the effectiveness of these programs. The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical and translational research training program at the University of Cincinnati by comparing the number of National Institutes of Health grants awarded to pediatric fellows who graduated from the MS degree program between 1995 and 2013 versus fellows who did not pursue an MS degree. Among 394 pediatric fellows, 16 of 81 (20%) MS alumni were awarded at least one NIH grant, as compared with 28 of 313 (9%) fellows who did not obtain an MS degree (p < 0.02). In multivariable analysis, MS alumni were more than three times as likely to have received at least one grant than were non-MS fellows (OR = 3.5, 95% CI [1.7-7.2]; C-statistic = 0.71) and MS alumni were more likely to obtain at least one K-series (OR = 4.1, 95% CI [1.6-10.2]; C-statistic = 0.74), M-series (OR = 11.8, 95% CI [3.4-41.4]; C-statistic = 0.81), or R-series (OR = 10.1, 95% CI [2.4-42.8]; C-statistic = 0.74) grant than were non-MS fellows. These findings suggest that graduate training in clinical and translational research prepares graduates for the highly competitive field of clinical and translational research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.