ReviewJournal of the American College of Cardiology2015
National Institutes of Health Career Development Awards for Cardiovascular Physician-Scientists: Recent Trends and Strategies for Success.
Review in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- NIH funding for the pediatric surgeon-scientist: An analysis of current trends.Surgery open science · 2025Article
- Biomedical research grant resubmission: rates and factors related to success - a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
- A Mentoring Network for Diversity in Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research.Journal of dental research · 2024Article
- Inspiring and Preparing Our Future Leaders: Evaluating the Impact of the Early Career Women's Leadership Program.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2024Article
- Surviving and Thriving as Physicians in General Internal Medicine Fellowship in the Twenty-First Century.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Inclusion in the Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine Physician-Scientist Workforce. Building with Intention.ATS scholar · 2020Article
- Status of Early-Career Academic Cardiology: A Global Perspective.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2017Review
- Clinician-Investigator Training and the Need to Pilot New Approaches to Recruiting and Retaining This Workforce.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2017Article
- Initial Outcomes for the NHLBI K99/R00 Pathway to Independence Program in Relation to Long-Standing Career Development Programs: Implications for Trainees, Mentors, and Institutions.Circulation research · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nurturing the development of cardiovascular physician-scientist investigators is critical for sustained progress in cardiovascular science and improving human health. The transition from an inexperienced trainee to an independent physician-scientist is a multifaceted process requiring a sustained commitment from the trainee, mentors, and institution. A cornerstone of this training process is a career development (K) award from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These awards generally require 75% of the awardee's professional effort devoted to research aims and diverse career development activities carried out in a mentored environment over a 5-year period. We report on recent success rates for obtaining NIH K awards, provide strategies for preparing a successful application and navigating the early career period for aspiring cardiovascular investigators, and offer cardiovascular division leadership perspectives regarding K awards in the current era. Our objective is to offer practical advice that will equip trainees considering an investigator path for success.
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.