Limits...
The impact of National Institutes of Health funding on U.S. cardiovascular disease research.

Lyubarova R, Itagaki BK, Itagaki MW - PLoS ONE (2009)

Bottom Line: Differences in means and trends were tested with t-tests and linear regression, respectively, with P < or = 0.05 for significance.A substantial fraction of research is now directly funded and thus likely sensitive to budget fluctuations, particularly in basic science research.NIH funding predicts greater journal impact.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Albany Medical College, Albany, New York, United States of America.

ABSTRACT

Background: Intense interest surrounds the recent expansion of US National Institutes of Health (NIH) budgets as part of economic stimulus legislation. However, the relationship between NIH funding and cardiovascular disease research is poorly understood, making the likely impact of this policy change unclear.

Methods: The National Library of Medicine's PubMed database was searched for articles published from 1996 to 2006, originating from U.S. institutions, and containing the phrases "cardiolog," "cardiovascular," or "cardiac," in the first author's department. Research methodology, journal of publication, journal impact factor, and receipt of NIH funding were recorded. Differences in means and trends were tested with t-tests and linear regression, respectively, with P < or = 0.05 for significance.

Results: Of 117,643 world cardiovascular articles, 36,684 (31.2%) originated from the U.S., of which 10,293 (28.1%) received NIH funding. The NIH funded 40.1% of U.S. basic science articles, 20.3% of overall clinical trials, 18.1% of randomized-controlled, and 12.2% of multicenter clinical trials. NIH-funded and total articles grew significantly (65 articles/year, P < 0.001 and 218 articles/year, P < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of articles receiving NIH funding was stable, but grew significantly for basic science and clinical trials (0.87%/year, P < 0.001 and 0.67%/year, P = 0.029, respectively). NIH-funded articles had greater journal impact factors than non NIH-funded articles (5.76 vs. 3.71, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: NIH influence on U.S. cardiovascular research expanded in the past decade, during the period of NIH budget doubling. A substantial fraction of research is now directly funded and thus likely sensitive to budget fluctuations, particularly in basic science research. NIH funding predicts greater journal impact.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Trends in NIH-funded and overall U.S. cardiovascular disease articles, 1996–2006, selected methodologies.Data were normalized to 1996 levels. All article types depicted here had statistically significant growth except all U.S. general research articles. Furthermore the ratio of NIH-funded to overall articles increased significantly for general research articles and clinical trials, indicating a proportionally increasing role played by the NIH for these article types.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2713403&req=5

pone-0006425-g001: Trends in NIH-funded and overall U.S. cardiovascular disease articles, 1996–2006, selected methodologies.Data were normalized to 1996 levels. All article types depicted here had statistically significant growth except all U.S. general research articles. Furthermore the ratio of NIH-funded to overall articles increased significantly for general research articles and clinical trials, indicating a proportionally increasing role played by the NIH for these article types.

Mentions: While numbers of both total and overall NIH-funded U.S. publications increased, there was no change in the relative proportion of NIH-funded articles. Statistically significant growth in this proportion was detected for a few specific methodologies, namely general research articles (0.87% per year, P = 0.005), therapeutic comparisons (0.52% per year, P = 0.017), randomized-controlled trials (0.92% per year, P = 0.007), and overall clinical trials (0.67% per year, P = 0.029). For these methodologies, the relative impact of the NIH expanded. Support for meta-analyses decreased (4.47% per year, P = 0.021), and all other methodologies showed no significant change, Table 2. Comparative growth in selected article methodologies is depicted in Figure 1.


The impact of National Institutes of Health funding on U.S. cardiovascular disease research.

Lyubarova R, Itagaki BK, Itagaki MW - PLoS ONE (2009)

Trends in NIH-funded and overall U.S. cardiovascular disease articles, 1996–2006, selected methodologies.Data were normalized to 1996 levels. All article types depicted here had statistically significant growth except all U.S. general research articles. Furthermore the ratio of NIH-funded to overall articles increased significantly for general research articles and clinical trials, indicating a proportionally increasing role played by the NIH for these article types.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2713403&req=5

pone-0006425-g001: Trends in NIH-funded and overall U.S. cardiovascular disease articles, 1996–2006, selected methodologies.Data were normalized to 1996 levels. All article types depicted here had statistically significant growth except all U.S. general research articles. Furthermore the ratio of NIH-funded to overall articles increased significantly for general research articles and clinical trials, indicating a proportionally increasing role played by the NIH for these article types.
Mentions: While numbers of both total and overall NIH-funded U.S. publications increased, there was no change in the relative proportion of NIH-funded articles. Statistically significant growth in this proportion was detected for a few specific methodologies, namely general research articles (0.87% per year, P = 0.005), therapeutic comparisons (0.52% per year, P = 0.017), randomized-controlled trials (0.92% per year, P = 0.007), and overall clinical trials (0.67% per year, P = 0.029). For these methodologies, the relative impact of the NIH expanded. Support for meta-analyses decreased (4.47% per year, P = 0.021), and all other methodologies showed no significant change, Table 2. Comparative growth in selected article methodologies is depicted in Figure 1.

Bottom Line: Differences in means and trends were tested with t-tests and linear regression, respectively, with P < or = 0.05 for significance.A substantial fraction of research is now directly funded and thus likely sensitive to budget fluctuations, particularly in basic science research.NIH funding predicts greater journal impact.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Albany Medical College, Albany, New York, United States of America.

ABSTRACT

Background: Intense interest surrounds the recent expansion of US National Institutes of Health (NIH) budgets as part of economic stimulus legislation. However, the relationship between NIH funding and cardiovascular disease research is poorly understood, making the likely impact of this policy change unclear.

Methods: The National Library of Medicine's PubMed database was searched for articles published from 1996 to 2006, originating from U.S. institutions, and containing the phrases "cardiolog," "cardiovascular," or "cardiac," in the first author's department. Research methodology, journal of publication, journal impact factor, and receipt of NIH funding were recorded. Differences in means and trends were tested with t-tests and linear regression, respectively, with P < or = 0.05 for significance.

Results: Of 117,643 world cardiovascular articles, 36,684 (31.2%) originated from the U.S., of which 10,293 (28.1%) received NIH funding. The NIH funded 40.1% of U.S. basic science articles, 20.3% of overall clinical trials, 18.1% of randomized-controlled, and 12.2% of multicenter clinical trials. NIH-funded and total articles grew significantly (65 articles/year, P < 0.001 and 218 articles/year, P < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of articles receiving NIH funding was stable, but grew significantly for basic science and clinical trials (0.87%/year, P < 0.001 and 0.67%/year, P = 0.029, respectively). NIH-funded articles had greater journal impact factors than non NIH-funded articles (5.76 vs. 3.71, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: NIH influence on U.S. cardiovascular research expanded in the past decade, during the period of NIH budget doubling. A substantial fraction of research is now directly funded and thus likely sensitive to budget fluctuations, particularly in basic science research. NIH funding predicts greater journal impact.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus