ArticleAnnals of surgery2025
Where You Train Matters: Surgeon-Scientists Disproportionately Trained at Highly Funded Institutions.
Article in Annals of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the distribution of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded surgeon-scientists by residency training institution and to examine whether training at institutions with higher NIH funding is associated with greater individual NIH funding. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Surgeon-scientists face challenges securing NIH funding, with surgical research funding lagging behind other fields. Training in resource-rich environments may enhance research engagement and funding success.
methodsBlue Ridge Institute for Medical Research (BRIMR) rankings were used to identify NIH-funded principal investigators (NIH-PIs) among surgeons in Departments of Surgery from 2013-2023. Residency program NIH-funding quartiles, and top-ten programs, were determined by averaging institutional funding from BRIMR spreadsheets. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, nonparametric tests, Z-tests, and linear regression were performed.
resultsAmong 559 NIH-funded surgeon-scientists, 394 (70.5%) trained at first-quartile institutions, representing 75-82% of NIH-PIs annually and receiving 79-85% of total funding each year. Total annual funding was significantly higher among first-quartile trained NIH-PIs ($117.9 vs. $24.8 million; P <0.0001), though median funding per NIH-PI did not differ ($354,544 vs. $328,179; P =0.358). In subgroup analysis, top-ten trained NIH-PIs had higher median funding per PI ($379,407 vs. $322,666; P =0.013) and experienced faster annual growth in funding per PI ($61,920/year vs. $38,666/year, P =0.009) even when adjusted for current affiliated institution funding quartile. Additionally, top-ten trained PIs exhibited greater scientific influence measured by the NIH iCite tool's weighted relative citation ratio (119 vs. 100; P =0.034).
conclusionSurgeon-scientists who trained at first-quartile institutions represent the majority of NIH-funded investigators, highlighting the potential influence of training in well-funded environments.
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.