ArticleMolecular biology of the cell2015
Maximizing the return on taxpayers' investments in fundamental biomedical research.
Article in Molecular biology of the cell, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators.Evaluation and program planning · 2023Article
- Gender, Racial, and Ethnic and Inequities in Receipt of Multiple National Institutes of Health Research Project Grants.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- The effectiveness of Japanese public funding to generate emerging topics in life science and medicine.PloS one · 2023Article
- Fund behavioral science like the frameworks we endorse: the case for increased funding of preliminary studies by the National Institutes of Health.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- The ripple effects of funding on researchers and output.Science advances · 2022Article
- Professional development and career-preparedness experiences of STEM Ph.D. students: Gaps and avenues for improvement.PloS one · 2021Article
- Putting advanced microscopy in the hands of biologists.Nature methods · 2019Article
- Opinion: The National Institutes of Health needs to better balance funding distributions among US institutions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- The NIH must reduce disparities in funding to maximize its return on investments from taxpayers.eLife · 2018Article
- The argument for diversifying the NIH grant portfolio.Molecular biology of the cell · 2017Article
- Future of fundamental discovery in US biomedical research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Enhancing Graduate and Postdoctoral Education To Create a Sustainable Biomedical Workforce.Human gene therapy · 2016Article
- Article
- 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) at the U.S. National Institutes of Health has an annual budget of more than $2.3 billion. The institute uses these funds to support fundamental biomedical research and training at universities, medical schools, and other institutions across the country. My job as director of NIGMS is to work to maximize the scientific returns on the taxpayers' investments. I describe how we are optimizing our investment strategies and funding mechanisms, and how, in the process, we hope to create a more efficient and sustainable biomedical research enterprise.
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.