Bowman, Marjorie A. and Rubenstein, Arthur H. and Levine, Arthur S.
Increasing an academic health system's research productivity is an institutional challenge that requires multiple complex actions over a sustained period of time. In this Commentary, we describe how 2 academic health systems with different organizational structures used similar models of investment of clinical income in the research enterprise to enhance their success. This strategy assumes enhanced urgency in the current climate of flat National Institutes of Health (NIH) budgets. In 2006, NIH experienced its first budget cut since 1970, resulting in a 13% loss of research purchasing power since 2003, while grant applications have doubled since 1998.1 The level of NIH support remains one of the few objective benchmarks by which an academic health system can evaluate its academic and research success. Unlike reputational rankings, the NIH process is the only nationally competitive, peer-reviewed metric available.
|Export/Citation:||EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII (Chicago style) | HTML Citation | OpenURL | Reference Manager|
|Social Networking:|| |
|Additional Information:||Access to full text is subject to the publisher's access restrictions.|
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||academic health systems, research productivity, National Institutes of Health (NIH), research awards,|
|Depositing User:||Users 141 not found.|
|Date Deposited:||09 Jul 2007|
|Last Modified:||13 May 2011 09:38|
|Link to this item (URI):||http://health-equity.pitt.edu/id/eprint/729|
Actions (login required)