Billion For Research Research Articles

AMIA board of directors response to Simborg perspective

AMIA board of directors response to Simborg perspective

Patents in the University: Priming the Pump and Crowding Out

The Bayh-Dole Act allows universities to exploit patents on their federally sponsored research. University laboratories therefore have two sources of funds: direct grants from sponsors and income from licensing. Tax credits for private R&D also contribute, because they increase the profitability of licensing. Because Bayh-Dole profits are a source of funds, the question arises how subsidies and Bayh-Dole profits fit together. I show that subsidies to the university can either prime the pump for spending out of Bayh-Dole funds, or can crowd it out. Because of crowding out, if the sponsor wants to increase university spending beyond the university's own target, it will end up funding the entire research bill, just as if there were no profit opportunities under the Bayh-Dole Act. A subsidy system that requires university matching can mitigate this problem.

Former NSF assistant director Killeen reflects on geosciences and society

“This is prime time for the geosciences,” Tim Killeen, former assistant director for geosciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF GEO), told Eos during a recent exclusive interview. Killeen, who served at NSF from July 2008 until his term expired in June 2012, oversaw a number of new initiatives and an expansion of the geoscience directorate's annual funding portfolio from $752 million to about $880 million. NSF announced on 7 November that Roger Wakimoto, director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, will start as the new geosciences assistant director in February 2013 (see related article, this page, and Eos, 93(47), 475, doi:10.1029/ 2012EO470004). During the broad‐ranging interview, Killeen reflected on the importance of the geosciences and their relationship to society. Killeen has been president of the Research Foundation for the State University of New York (RFSUNY) and SUNY vice chancellor for research since 9 July. He took the helm of RFSUNY after some personnel there “took advantage of lax oversight to cheat taxpayers,” according to New York State comptroller Thomas DiNapoli. Killeen, who was AGU president from 2006 to 2008, is responsible for the supervision and operation of RFSUNY, which supports about $1 billion in research at SUNY, an institution with 64 campuses and nearly 470,000 students.

Commissioning the University of Excellence: Swedish research policy and new public research funding programmes

In many countries, current research policy is dominated by managerialism and excellence, manifesting the aim of making universities into national strategic assets in the globally competitive knowledge economy. This article discusses these policy trends and their mirror in recent developments in public funding for academic research, with special attention to Sweden. A review of the language in three consecutive Swedish governmental research bills from the past 10 years shows a clear policy shift towards the promotion of excellence and strategic priority on the level of higher education institutions. Reforms to the funding system, especially the launch of specific strategic excellence funding programmes, are introduced to put the policy in practice. While the policy shift itself might be discursive, the changes to the funding system clearly show a determination on behalf of the Swedish government to increase strategic profiling and the pursuit of excellence in research on behalf of universities.

SU‐E‐I‐45: The Human Imaging Research Office (HIRO): Advancing the Role of Imaging in Clinical Research

Purpose: The clinical imaging infrastructure has been designed for the consistent execution of standard‐of‐care imaging examinations. Many imaging protocols for clinical research, however, have unique requirements that may burden the established infrastructure. Our purpose was to develop a solution to the many imaging demands and challenges presented by clinical research.Methods: We have created the Human Imaging Research Office (HIRO) at our institution. The HIRO is responsible for coordinating the acquisition, collection, analysis, and maintenance of images and related data associated with clinical research studies involving human subjects. The purpose of the HIRO is to coordinate, harmonize, and streamline the imaging aspects of clinical research, so that these non‐standard examinations can be performed as required by the study protocol. In effect, the HIRO is becoming the institutional resource for a broad spectrum of research imaging needs. The activities and services of the HIRO include site validation and image quality verification, development of standardized research‐specific requisition and reporting forms, scheduling, implementation of research billing codes, study‐specific image‐based measurements, collection of customized image databases, and distribution of anonymized images to researchers and study sponsors.Results: The HIRO has helped facilitate the acquisition of images for clinical research for 117 active, pending, or recently closed clinical research studies. These clinical research studies are being conducted by 60 unique principal investigators across 14 different sections and departments within the Medical Center. The HIRO has filled over 650 requests for de‐identified images, accounting for over 42.3 million images Conclusions: Imaging for clinical research often has requirements that differ substantially from those of clinical imaging. The complex infrastructure for standard‐of‐care imaging typically is stressed by the unique technical and administrative needs of a research protocol. The HIRO is able to respond effectively to the dynamic imaging needs of clinical research.SGA, HM, and MLG receive royalties and licensing fees through the University of Chicago related to computer‐aided diagnosis. HM is a consultant for Riverain Medical.

Responsibility Rewarded: Ethics, Engagement, and Scientific Autonomy in the Labyrinth of the Minotaur

Dramatic changes in the stem cell ethical and research ecosystem in the last 10 years depended on active engagement among scientists, ethicists, government, and public. Tracing that story demonstrates the value of such engagement, and forecasts a successful method for meeting future challenges.

U.S. Science Agency Budgets Slated for Increases

The Obama administration released more details on 7 May about its proposed US$3.6 trillion federal budget for fiscal year (FY) 2010 and the planned significant increases for science agencies and for research and development (see Eos, 90(10), 83, 2009). The budget, which needs to be approved by Congress, includes $147.6 billion for research and development, an increase of $555 million, or 0.4%, above the enacted 2009 budget. In addition, the 2009 budget includes $18.3 billion in stimulus spending for research and development through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, said the FY 2009 and proposed 2010 budgets are among the two largest research and development investments in the nation's history, in real terms. “We in the science and technology community have done better than just about any other constituency in the budget,” Holdren explained in a 7 May budget overview briefing, noting that virtually every science agency is doing better now than it was doing 2 years ago. “We have, in the White House, a president who gets it, believes and gets that investments in science and technology are just that: investments that will pay off.”

Deciding on human embryonic stem cell research: Evidence from Congress's first showdown by President George W. Bush

This paper examines the influences that congressional staff people viewed as important in shaping legislators' voting decisions on the human embryonic stem (ES) cell research bill in the 109th Congress, the first legislation vetoed by President George W. Bush. The analysis illuminates factors that impact congressional decision making on a salient issue with a strong moral component. Constituent concerns, ideology, and a desire to make good public policy all centrally affected members' choices; however, moral overtones permeated considerations relevant to the human ES cell research question. In addition, at least three influences that directly reflect or relate to members' moral claims - religious convictions, personal connections to potential beneficiaries of human ES cell research, and moral pressure from outside interests - were important also. The analysis draws on data gathered from interviews with congressional aides.

Science Wins $21 Billion Boost as Stimulus Package Becomes Law

U.S. BUDGETThis week, a historic $787 billion economic stimulus package was signed into law that provides more than $21 billion for research and scientific infrastructure, including $10 billion for the National Institutes of Health, $3 billion for the National Science Foundation, and $1.6 billion for the Department of Energy's Office of Science.

SCIENCE WINDFALL FROM LEGISLATORS

THE HOUSE passed an $819 billion stimulus package (H.R. 1) last week that contains more than $13 billion for research and development. At the same time, the Senate was working on its version of the bill (S. 1), an estimated $888 billion package that has some $12 billion for R&D. “The investments in science and technology in the recovery package are timely and targeted. They will create high-quality jobs in the short term while making strides to strengthen American competitiveness over the long-term,” said Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), chairman of the House Committee on Science & Technology, in support of H.R. 1. Thomas H. Lane, president of the American Chemical Society, which publishes C&EN, sent a letter to Congress encouraging them to “move swiftly to pass legislation with the science and technology portions intact.” Members of Congress used letters like Lane’s to support the bill. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told members of the House ...

Rx for the Pharmaceutical Industry: Call Your Doctors

Pharmaceutical companies are guilty of moral misconduct. They stretch the definitions of illnesses, such as bipolar disorder, in order to expand markets. (1) They sponsor seeding studies, such as Merck's ADVANTAGE trial (Assessment of Differences between Vioxx and Naproxen to Ascertain Gastrointestinal Tolerability and Effectiveness), in order to facilitate the rapid uptake of a new drug at the time of its launch. (2) They promote unapproved uses of drugs, such as Lilly's Viva Zyprexa campaign, in which sales representatives recommended the drug for dementia. (3) These activities all aim to maximize sales. Yet drug companies have translated scientific discoveries into products that have improved and extended the lives of millions of people. For example, statins prolong survival in patients with coronary artery disease, (4) tumor necrosis factor inhibitors retard joint destruction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, (5) and imatinib induces remission in most patients with chronic myeloid leukemia. (6) Sometimes alone and sometimes in collaboration with investigators from academia or government, the pharmaceutical industry has helped people live longer, better lives. Drug companies are also a source of crucial research funding. The U.S. pharmaceutical industry invested $47.9 billion in research and development in 2007. (7) If the current level of productivity and investment from the private sector is to continue without repeating the pitfalls of the past, we must collaborate with industry to find better ways of ensuring ethical drug development. Multiple changes will be necessary to achieve this end. External reforms so far have come from the government, (8) academia, (9) and journal editors. (10) Internal ethics initiatives have also been introduced at several companies. (11) For example, Roche established an external Science and Ethics Advisory Group. (12) Merck and Abbott have established ethics offices. (13) GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, and Abbott maintain confidential helplines that employees may call to report potential violations. (14) The industry deserves credit for taking these steps. Whether they actually have a positive impact or serve simply as window-dressing intended to disarm critics remains to be seen. What else can be done to bridge the gap between the industry's key role in producing important products and the parade of unethical actions that plague it? As a physician and a former vice-president of Pfizer, I believe that a previously unrecognized way of addressing the problem may already exist inside the pharmaceutical industry itself, in the form of the physicians who work there. In order for industry physicians to ensure ethical behavior, it is necessary that they: 1) make decisions about ethical issues; 2) acknowledge they have a moral duty to ensure that their company behaves ethically; 3) possess the knowledge and skills required to perform their jobs; 4) have the responsibility and the incentive to conduct clinical research ethically, rather than just to increase revenue; and 5) work in a culture that recognizes and supports their expertise and their role. Roles and Obligations of Physicians in Industry Approximately eighty-six thousand medical and scientific professionals work in drug companies in the United States. (15) Pharmaceutical physicians are deployed throughout the industry in many positions--as bench researchers, focusing on the discovery of new drugs; as clinical researchers, designing, implementing, and overseeing phase I--IV trials; and as safety experts, focusing on pharmacovigilance, which refers to monitoring the side effects of a drug. Others compile medical information, review promotional materials, create speakers bureaus, and review independent medical grants. Many work with marketers and other colleagues to create product development plans, launch new products, and implement strategies to support approved compounds. Given the diversity of jobs carried out by physicians in industry, it is not surprising that they participate in making many ethically laden decisions, ranging from the selection of disease targets to the proper conduct of trials in the third world to the monitoring and management of potential safety issues. …

The Nuts and Bolts of Clinical Research Billing

The Nuts and Bolts of Clinical Research Billing

Can third-party payments benefit the principal?: The case of soft dollar brokerage

In a typical soft dollar arrangement, a security broker provides an institutional portfolio manager with credits to buy research from independent vendors in consideration for the manager's promise to send the broker premium commission business when trading his portfolio securities. Because portfolio investors implicitly pay for brokerage, critics argue soft dollars reflect a breach of loyalty in which the manager unjustly enriches himself by shifting to investors the research bill he should pay out of his own pocket. We hypothesize, to the contrary, that by paying the manager's research bill up-front the broker posts a quality-assuring performance bond that efficiently subsidizes the manager's investment research. Our database of private money managers shows premium commissions are positively related to risk-adjusted performance, suggesting soft dollars benefit investors. Premium commissions are also positively related to management fees, suggesting soft dollars are not a pure wealth transfer from investors that is competed away in the managerial labor market.

Paulson: Edit Out Credit

Before signing a research and science education bill last week ( Science , 10 August, p. [736][1]), President George W. Bush said he would continue to push for a priority that's not in it: making the corporate “research and development tax credit a permanent part of the tax code.” But next door, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson appears to be less supportive of the idea. Last month, in a white paper, Paulson said that lower corporate taxes and a simpler system could obviate the need for the research credit. The current credit, he said, “creates complexity”: time-consuming paperwork and exhaustive audits. “[T]he administrative difficulties erode the positive incentives [for research] the provision provides,” the paper said. Has Paulson jumped ship? No, says IBM lobbyist Linda Evans. “The treasury secretary is looking long term,” she says, whereas the White House has more near-term thinking. (A treasury spokesperson did not return calls.) Paulson's ideas are unlikely to get much traction in the Democratic Congress, where a focus is on making the credits permanent; bills that would do that have more than 100 cosponsors between the Senate and House versions, but they've gotten no hearings. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.317.5839.736

U.S. Congress considers hurricane research bills

Legislation currently being considered by both the U.S. House and Senate would create a National Hurricane Research Initiative. The legislation was developed in response to a January 2007 U.S. National Science Board report,“Hurricane warning: The critical need for a National Hurricane Research Initiative.”Both bills require the hurricane research initiative to set objectives in order to make recommendations to the National Science Board and to assemble U.S. science and engineering expertise through an interagency effort designed to bring together the latest research focusing on infrastructure, forecasting, and mitigating impacts on coastal populations. The bills also require the initiative to set objectives for making grants for hurricane research on a variety of topics, ranging from hurricane dynamics to improving emergency communications networks. Coordination of the interagency effort would fall under the jurisdiction of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Again, Stem Cell Research Bill Goes Back to President for Review

Again, Stem Cell Research Bill Goes Back to President for Review

CONGRESSIONAL OUTLOOK 2007

THE DRAMATIC SHIFT in power in the federal government—with both the House of Representatives and the Senate coming under the control of the Democrats this year—guarantees a lot of debate but does not ensure much progress. The 110th Congress faces many of the same issues as the last one, especially the war in Iraq and national security problems, and these concerns will continue to dominate national debate. There are a number of science and technology issues—environmental rules, stem cell research, pharmaceutical safety, energy production—that are high priorities for the Democrats. The party, however, has only slim voting majorities, especially in the Senate, which will make controversial legislation as difficult to pass this year as it was last year. Democrats in the House did, however, manage to push through several bills on their agenda during the much-publicized first 100 hours legislative blitz. These include a stem cell research bill and bills to raise the minimum wage ...

EU Seventh framework programme–€54 billion for research

EU Seventh framework programme–€54 billion for research

President Bush Vetoes Stem Cell Research Bill

President Bush Vetoes Stem Cell Research Bill

Part 3: International evaluation of Swedish public health research

1. Executive summary The Swedish government has asked for a description and evaluation of Swedish public health research (PHR) in order to compile background material for a government research bill to be submitted to the Swedish Riksdag. The National Institute of Public Health, Sweden (NIPH) and the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (FAS) are responsible for producing various types of relevant material for the government – and separate material associated with this evaluation report has been produced by NIPH. FAS and NIPH – having cooperated in the planning of this independent international evaluation of PHR – appointed an international panel comprising experts from the USA, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Finland and Denmark.