Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort

<h4>Background</h4> Early career researchers face a hypercompetitive funding environment. To help identify effective intervention strategies for early career researchers, we examined whether first-time NIH R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application were more...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jamie Mihoko Doyle, Michael T. Baiocchi, Michaela Kiernan
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/83860bf86bd340a19214e7dd6189b515
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:83860bf86bd340a19214e7dd6189b515
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:83860bf86bd340a19214e7dd6189b5152021-11-25T06:19:37ZDownstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort1932-6203https://doaj.org/article/83860bf86bd340a19214e7dd6189b5152021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8601543/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4> Early career researchers face a hypercompetitive funding environment. To help identify effective intervention strategies for early career researchers, we examined whether first-time NIH R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful at obtaining any R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than original, unfunded applicants who submitted new NIH applications, and we examined whether underrepresented minority (URM) applicants differentially benefited from resubmission. Our observational study is consistent with an NIH working group’s recommendations to develop interventions to encourage resubmission. <h4>Methods and findings</h4> First-time applicants with US medical school academic faculty appointments who submitted an unfunded R01 application between 2000–2014 yielded 4,789 discussed and 7,019 not discussed applications. We then created comparable groups of first-time R01 applicants (resubmitted original R01 application or submitted new NIH applications) using optimal full matching that included applicant and application characteristics. Primary and subgroup analyses used generalized mixed models with obtaining any NIH R01 funding within 3 and 5 years as the two outcomes. A gamma sensitivity analysis was performed. URM applicants represented 11% and 12% of discussed and not discussed applications, respectively. First-time R01 applicants resubmitting their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful obtaining R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than applicants submitting new applications—for both discussed and not discussed applications: discussed within 3 years (OR 4.17 [95 CI 3.53, 4.93]) and 5 years (3.33 [2.82–3.92]); and not discussed within 3 years (2.81 [2.52, 3.13]) and 5 years (2.47 [2.22–2.74]). URM applicants additionally benefited within 5 years for not discussed applications. <h4>Conclusions</h4> Encouraging early career researchers applying as faculty at a school of medicine to resubmit R01 applications is a promising potential modifiable factor and intervention strategy. First-time R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application had log-odds of obtaining downstream R01 funding within 3 and 5 years 2–4 times higher than applicants who did not resubmit their original application and submitted new NIH applications instead. Findings held for both discussed and not discussed applications.Jamie Mihoko DoyleMichael T. BaiocchiMichaela KiernanPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 11 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Jamie Mihoko Doyle Michael T. Baiocchi Michaela Kiernan Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
description	<h4>Background</h4> Early career researchers face a hypercompetitive funding environment. To help identify effective intervention strategies for early career researchers, we examined whether first-time NIH R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful at obtaining any R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than original, unfunded applicants who submitted new NIH applications, and we examined whether underrepresented minority (URM) applicants differentially benefited from resubmission. Our observational study is consistent with an NIH working group’s recommendations to develop interventions to encourage resubmission. <h4>Methods and findings</h4> First-time applicants with US medical school academic faculty appointments who submitted an unfunded R01 application between 2000–2014 yielded 4,789 discussed and 7,019 not discussed applications. We then created comparable groups of first-time R01 applicants (resubmitted original R01 application or submitted new NIH applications) using optimal full matching that included applicant and application characteristics. Primary and subgroup analyses used generalized mixed models with obtaining any NIH R01 funding within 3 and 5 years as the two outcomes. A gamma sensitivity analysis was performed. URM applicants represented 11% and 12% of discussed and not discussed applications, respectively. First-time R01 applicants resubmitting their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful obtaining R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than applicants submitting new applications—for both discussed and not discussed applications: discussed within 3 years (OR 4.17 [95 CI 3.53, 4.93]) and 5 years (3.33 [2.82–3.92]); and not discussed within 3 years (2.81 [2.52, 3.13]) and 5 years (2.47 [2.22–2.74]). URM applicants additionally benefited within 5 years for not discussed applications. <h4>Conclusions</h4> Encouraging early career researchers applying as faculty at a school of medicine to resubmit R01 applications is a promising potential modifiable factor and intervention strategy. First-time R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application had log-odds of obtaining downstream R01 funding within 3 and 5 years 2–4 times higher than applicants who did not resubmit their original application and submitted new NIH applications instead. Findings held for both discussed and not discussed applications.
format	article
author	Jamie Mihoko Doyle Michael T. Baiocchi Michaela Kiernan
author_facet	Jamie Mihoko Doyle Michael T. Baiocchi Michaela Kiernan
author_sort	Jamie Mihoko Doyle
title	Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
title_short	Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
title_full	Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
title_fullStr	Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
title_full_unstemmed	Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort
title_sort	downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: a matched cohort
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/83860bf86bd340a19214e7dd6189b515
work_keys_str_mv	AT jamiemihokodoyle downstreamfundingsuccessofearlycareerresearchersforresubmittedversusnewapplicationsamatchedcohort AT michaeltbaiocchi downstreamfundingsuccessofearlycareerresearchersforresubmittedversusnewapplicationsamatchedcohort AT michaelakiernan downstreamfundingsuccessofearlycareerresearchersforresubmittedversusnewapplicationsamatchedcohort
_version_	1718413873955995648

Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort

Ejemplares similares