Successful Research Career Research Articles

Notes from the NHLBI Director

With fiscal year 2007 well under way, we write to report on the status of our budget for the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). As a result of a Congressional joint resolution, the NHLBI received an allocation of $2,918,808,000, which represents an increase of about one percent over the comparable figure for fiscal year 2006. The NHLBI has a longstanding and powerful commitment to preserve and enhance investigator-initiated research and to develop and support new investigators. In these difficult times, the Institute’s top priorities will be to stay true to these core values. To accomplish this objective, we have developed a number of strategies to assist investigators in launching successful research careers and riding out tough times. Several policies are designed to ease the path to independence for new investigators (http:// www.nhlbi.nih.gov/funding/policies/operguid.htm).

Academic Careers in Cardiovascular Medicine

With aging of the US population and continued success in prolonging survival of patients with cardiovascular disease, the prevalence of cardiovascular disease will increase exponentially in the next several decades.1 The anticipated supply of cardiovascular specialists will be insufficient to meet the demands of this increasing disease burden. A shortage already exists of cardiologists as a whole, and this shortage has translated to an even greater undersupply of academic cardiovascular specialists as fewer and fewer physicians who enter the field pursue academic positions. Prolonged training periods, expanding debt burdens, increasing discrepancies between salaries in academic and private practice positions, and a perceived lack of funding for research continue to push cardiologists into the private sector. The cardiovascular clinician-scientist is an endangered species. So the question arises: How do we combat these real and perceived threats and increase the number of young cardiologists choosing careers in academic cardiovascular medicine? The purpose of this series of articles in Circulation is to provide trainees and new faculty with a practical guide to launching a successful research career in cardiovascular medicine across the spectrum of cardiovascular specialties and across the strata of scientific investigation. The primer will provide advice for choosing a mentor; selecting a research project; identifying funding opportunities; selecting a research career pathway among the many opportunities in basic, clinical, epidemiologic, outcomes, and translational research; writing a grant; publishing a paper; finding a job; and making the transition from fellow to faculty. In addition, issues on ethics in cardiovascular research and specific considerations for international trainees are included. Our aim is to provide new investigators with many of the tools they will need to make informed choices about entering academic cardiovascular medicine and to make the initial career stages as successful as possible. Cardiovascular medicine is a specialty defined by research …

Five key principles of a successful clinical research career in infectious diseases

Many talented physicians enter fellowship training in infectious diseases with the ambition to pursue an academic career that includes investigation. Although many embark on laboratory research projects during their research training years, our experience is that most are drawn toward clinical research. For these physicians with extensive bedside training, clinical research has the immediate appeal of clinical relevance. It is often perceived as a natural extension of their expertise. However, as their training ensues, physicians quickly realize the complexity involved in garnering the essentials to success: continued didactic training, securing research funding, publishing results, and most importantly, adjusting to the relatively slow pace of achievement. Additional hurdles for the clinical investigator include learning the process of protocol review by institutional review boards and developing close collaborative relationships with data collectors, data managers, data analysts, and biostatisticians. Without proper mentorship and preparation, many talented individuals become despondent, feel inadequate, and search for alternative career paths. For many young investigators, it is not clear how to develop such a career and avoid common pitfalls. Based on our combined experiences as mentees and mentors, we have outlined fi ve key principles to a successful career in infectious diseases clinical research.

Just Give Them Grants

The interdependent gold standards of a successful career in academic research are publication in prestigious journals and securing funding for one9s independent research. There has been much discussion among scientists and funders about how best to launch such a career and how to fill the pipeline of young scientists to sustain the momentum of science (see also discussions at www.sciencecareers.org).

Research: Questions and Answers From Academic Trauma Surgeons

The impact of recent social and professional influences on trauma research is unclear. This study characterizes current research practices, opinions on research quality, and barriers to academic productivity, expressed by academic trauma surgeons. A survey tool was administered electronically to members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma. Questions on demographics, current and past research experience, perceptions of research quality trends, and barriers to academic success were included. Response rate was 40% (322 of 815). The mean age of respondents was 45 with 73% reporting completion of a critical care fellowship and 63% practicing in a university setting. The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that both basic science (75%) and clinical (82%) research have become more difficult to perform. Greater difficulty in obtaining funding from their institutions was reported by 69% and by 61% for industry or private sources. Approximately 70% agreed that Institutional review board (IRB) regulations, confidentiality and consent requirements have impeded their research efforts whereas 86% agreed that increasing clinical requirements have inhibited their research efforts. Factors seen as impeding multi-institutional research, in order, were funding, IRB issues, poor coordination, commitment of investigators, and logistics. Perceived barriers to a successful research career were insufficient protected time (42%), funding (25%), personal motivation (11%), and IRB issues (11%). Research is viewed as being more difficult to conduct. The primary barriers to research productivity are perceived to be decreased protected time, decreased funding availability, and increased regulatory requirements.

American Gastroenterological Association to the Institute of Medicine: Research Needed to Understand Plight of the Physician–Investigator

In an advocacy statement issued on September 24, 2007, the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) recommended that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) conduct a thorough analysis of the problems and issues involved in the recruitment and retention of physician-scientists and make recommendations on how to address these issues. “The number of physicians pursuing careers as scientists/researchers is not keeping pace with the national need for this research, while, at the same time, the average age of physician-scientists is rising,” the statement noted. Included among the many reasons that contribute to the attrition of physician-scientists were:•The large and increasing salary differential between physician-investigators and full-time practitioners.•High levels of debt after completion of formal education.•The high business costs of running individual laboratories and the uncertainty of continued National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant money or foundation funds to permit scientists to accomplish their studies.•Competition among investigators for a limited number of NIH or other type of funds.•Difficulty in the retention of clinical investigators because those with either an MD degree alone or those proposing clinical research have the lowest success rates for receiving R01 funding.•The time horizon necessary to demonstrate tangible progress in clinical research often stretches beyond the funding period. Simultaneously, it is challenging to generate meaningful preliminary data without funding.•Physicians may not be exposed to the possibilities of a scientific path early enough in their careers (eg, medical school). Established faculty members may not present a scientific career in an attractive light.•Mentoring and institutional salary support may not be adequate.•Lifestyle issues relating to time for family and other activities. According to the AGA, specific areas of study for the IOM should include the following:1What are the factors, both for success and failure, that attract and sustain a researcher in his or her research career?2What are the factors, aside from debt, that adversely affect the retention of young physician-scientists in the field of biomedical research?3Is the selection process for fellows adequate for the current environment? Will codified training improve success (ie, formal MS, MPH, or PhD training programs that can be offered as an option during the fellowship training period)?4Has the NIH established a national target for the number of trainees and researchers?5What actions have been taken to retain and support translational/clinical researchers, within the current funding environment?6If biomedical research is perceived as a potentially undesirable career, are there public relations strategies that can be developed to reverse this opinion?7How are established investigators presenting the profession to future researchers?8MD–PhD training programs have little focus on clinical or epidemiological research training. Are there future plans to expand training opportunities into nonbasic areas?9Is there an advantage to conducting a research manpower analysis? The IOM was also called upon to collect data on cultural barriers to research careers, aspirations of fellows, characteristics needed for a successful career in biomedical research, and grassroots efforts at the state and local level that are affecting change under the current conditions.

Notes From the Director, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

With fiscal year 2007 well under way, we write to report on the status of our budget for the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). As a result of a Congressional joint resolution, the NHLBI received an allocation of $2 918 808 000, which represents an increase of ≈1% over the comparable figure for fiscal year 2006. The NHLBI has a longstanding and powerful commitment to preserve and enhance investigator-initiated research and to develop and support new investigators. In these difficult times, the NHLBI’s top priorities will be to stay true to these core values. To accomplish this objective, we have developed a number of strategies to assist investigators in launching successful research careers and riding out tough times. Several policies are designed to ease the path to independence for new investigators (http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/funding/policies/operguid.htm):

Further Movement toward Insight and Relevance

The positioning of McAlister's (2005) arguments (“Toward Insight and Relevance”) in Gaski's comment as being the polar opposite of those proposed by Holbrook (2005) misses McAlister's point. Rather than proposing that all research and teaching should be managerially relevant, McAlister argued that managerial relevance should not be viewed as an impediment to a successful research career in consumer behavior.

The BPS Diploma in Advanced Pharmacology: a new training opportunity (BPS Dip Pharmacol)

British Journal of Pharmacology (2007) 150, 129. doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707112

Learning to Lead

A successful research career requires not only an aptitude for science but also the mastering of other skills including communication, management, and grant writing. A growing number of programs at universities and research institutes aim to teach these crucial skills to graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty.

The 2005 Dolph Adams awards and the state of the Journal of Leukocyte Biology

The 2005 Dolph Adams awards and the state of the <i>Journal of Leukocyte Biology</i>

Insights from interviews

From time to time, students who are ready for third‐level education ask me whether they should study science and if it offers more job possibilities than becoming an academic researcher. They are unsure about their life‐long interests and want to keep their options open. It is indeed very tempting to present the BSc degree as the first step to a glittering range of exciting career possibilities, both inside and outside academia. But the reality is that at that early stage a young ‘scientist’ is not trained sufficiently to compete effectively with more experienced scientists for most job openings. A career in science writing, for example, requires retraining and additional experience before being able to perform at the same level as seasoned journalists. Another option is to become a teacher at secondary‐school level, but this, again, is not possible without additional training. If an entry‐level job in industry is found, significant promotion will probably be difficult. The …

A Survey of Past Obstetrics and Gynecology Research Fellows

To survey obstetrician-gynecologist-scientists to determine factors that enhanced or hindered research careers. A pretested mail survey was sent to 107 obstetrician-gynecologists who had received research fellowship awards from professional organizations during the years 1971-1999. Demographic information along with face-value, forced-choice and yes-no questions as well as those asking for a single response using a Likert-type scale were requested. Two open-ended questions were also asked. The questionnaire was designed to obtain at least a 60% return. A 62.2% return demonstrated that 92% of this group of former fellows holds academic positions. Twenty-four percent of respondents had no research mentors in the first 5 years after fellowship, and 58% had or have National Institutes of Health grant awards, with an average of two grants. The majority believed they did not have adequate time to conduct research, stating that 80% or more time was necessary for a successful research career. Career success of the respondents is variable and is related to mentors, time allocated to research, and funding. The obstetrics and gynecology specialty must find ways to provide increased mentoring and time allocation to encourage funding opportunities.

Carol Hirshman: Recipient of the 2000 Excellence in Research Award

Carol Hirshman: Recipient of the 2000 Excellence in Research Award

Hints on writing technical papers and making presentations

This paper is an attempt to give some guidelines on how to write a good technical paper and to make good presentations, important skills for a successful career in research and teaching.

The RSNA-AUR-ARRS introduction to research program for 2nd year radiology residents: effect on career choice and early academic performance. Radiological Society of North America. Association of University Radiologists. American Roentgen Ray Society.

To evaluate graduates of the first 5 years of the Introduction to Research program, sponsored by the Radiological Society of North America, Association of University Radiologists, and American Roentgen Ray Society, to determine if they more frequently entered and demonstrated early success in academic careers than did nonparticipants. In 1997, the authors surveyed all 396 program participants for the 1990-1995 period and 2,047 nonparticipants who were in the same residencies as the participants during that period. Career plans, research participation, and academic achievements were compared. The survey was completed by 321 participants (81%) and 1,153 nonparticipants (56%). More than a third of participants thought the program had a strong effect on their initial career decision. Forty-one percent of participants who completed training (n = 192) were currently in academia versus 26% of nonparticipants (n = 676; P = .001). Of the 321 participants, 35% believed they would spend most of their careers in academia and 15% thought research would be their major focus versus 19% and 8% for the 1,153 nonparticipants (P < .001). Participants had higher levels of academic achievement earlier in their careers than did nonparticipants. The Introduction to Research program is encouraging the development of successful research careers. However, the results may be influenced by the self- or departmental selection of participants who were oriented toward research independent of program participation.

Searching the patent pipeline

Understanding which intellectual property has already been staked out is becoming critical to a successful research career.

WOMEN'S CAREERS IN SCIENCE AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

This introductory article by the Chairman of the Special Committee for Humanities of the Austrian Commission for UNESCO introduces the conference, the proceedings of which follow. The author gives a brief history of one of the co‐sponsors, the Institute for East and South‐East European Studies of Austria, following it with a few references to the admission of women to selected European universities in the mid‐nineteenth century. The question asked is whether or not a good university education suffices for a woman to be able to undertake a successful career in research and development (R&D).

Pathways to Improved Radiologic Research

In summary, the workshop recommended two years of research training as being essential for radiologists to acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to begin a successful research career in today's funding and academic environment. Many pathways can combine two years of research training and provide fulfillment of existing requirements to achieve specialty certification and subspecialty credentialing. Departments of radiology supporting the beginning qualified investigator should allow him or her approximately 75% research time for the first three years of the academic appointment. Departmental research time accorded faculty members may best be concentrated on a few individuals, providing them sufficient time to be competitive for peer-reviewed grants and enabling research advances to provide a solid foundation for the future of radiologic imaging.

Research and Research Training in Academic Radiology Departments A Survey of Department Chairmen

We surveyed 121 chairmen of academic radiology departments to assess how these departments select and educate their residents and fellows in research. Eighty-six chairmen responded (71%). The majority of their programs select at least some of their trainees for their potential as researchers and nearly all encourage trainees to perform research. The more the selection process focuses on research, the greater the percentage of residents and fellows that participate in research during training. Nonetheless, only about one-third of residents and half of the fellows perform and publish research. Only half the programs offer formal research seminars and few trainees opt for additional research training. These results may relate to the relatively small percentage of faculty performing prospective clinical and laboratory research. These findings are disappointing in the light of previous results suggesting that performing research, publication, and formal research education during training correlate highly with the development of successful research careers. Chairmen could increase the likelihood of trainees choosing research careers and being successful in publishing research by providing early exposure to research experiences and providing formalized research training.