ArticleJAMA network open2023
Gender, Racial, and Ethnic and Inequities in Receipt of Multiple National Institutes of Health Research Project Grants.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.
- Part 3: Ethics: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.Circulation · 2025Guideline
- Trial
- Fostering Academic Inclusion and Representation: Enhancing Research Capacity for Black Nursing Academics in UK Universities-A Qualitative Multi-Study Protocol.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Targeted termination of scientific grants and minoritised researcher status in a national survey: a cross sectional analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- What breaks when federal commitments break: comment on Beccia et al.SSM. Mental health · 2026Article
- Article
- Federal Policy Changes and Career Stability Among NIH K-Award Recipients.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- How the 2025 NIH grant terminations varied by researchers' demographic groups.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Prevalence and Impact of Single-Day Events of Sexual Harassment, Racial Mistreatment, and Incivility on Biomedical Health Trainees: A Mixed-Methods Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Lottery before peer review is associated with increased female representation and reduced estimated economic cost in a German funding line.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Rigor and equity in intervention study design in pediatric psychology: a focus on comparator conditions from diabetes research.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2025Review
- Addressing Racial Disparities in the Hypertensive Disorders in Pregnancy: A Plan for Action from the Preeclampsia Foundation's Racial Disparities Task Force.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Review
- Gender gap in medicine: a call to action for Latin America.Human resources for health · 2025Article
- Ten simple rules for faculty members building just and equitable environments in academic science.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Composing authorship teams for health equity: an introduction to the health equity research production model.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Teaching inequity in vector-borne diseases management through a socioscientific issue framework.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Article
- Research Funded by National Institutes of Health Concerning Sexual and Gender Minoritized Populations: A Tracking Update for 2012 to 2022.American journal of public health · 2025Article
- The roles of psychosocial resources in reducing the impact of gendered racism on worry among Black women attending an HBCU.Journal of American college health : J of ACH · 2025Article
- Exploring grant writing coaching and its role in professional development of health equity investigators: A qualitative study.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Diversity in the biomedical research workforce is essential for addressing complex health problems. Female investigators and investigators from underrepresented ethnic and racial groups generate novel, impactful, and innovative research, yet they are significantly underrepresented among National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigators. Objective: To examine the gender, ethnic, and racial distribution of super NIH investigators who received 3 or more concurrent NIH grants. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included a national cohort of NIH-funded principal investigators (PIs) from the NIH Information for Management, Planning, Analysis, and Coordination (IMPAC II) database from 1991 to 2020. Exposures: Self-identified gender, race and ethnicity, annual number of NIH grant receipt, career stage, and highest degree. Main Outcomes and Measures: Distribution of investigators receiving 3 or more research project grants, referred to as super principal investigators (SPIs), by gender, race, and ethnicity. Results: Among 33 896 investigators in fiscal year 2020, 7478 (22.01%) identified as Asian, 623 (1.8%) as Black, 1624 (4.8%) as Hispanic, and 22 107 (65.2%) as White; 21 936 (61.7%) identified as men; and 8695 (35.3%) were early-stage investigators. Between 1991 and 2020, the proportion of SPIs increased 3-fold from 704 (3.7%) to 3942 (11.3%). However, SPI status was unequal across gender, ethnic, and racial groups. Women and Black PIs were significantly underrepresented among SPIs, even after adjusting for career stage and degree, and were 34% and 40% less likely than their male and White colleagues, respectively, to be an SPI. Black women PIs were the least likely to be represented among SPIs and were 71% less likely to attain SPI status than White men PIs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.21-0.41). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of a national cohort of NIH-funded investigators, the gender, ethnic, and racial gaps in receipt of multiple research project grants among NIH investigators was clearly apparent and warrants further investigation and interventions.
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.