The Effects of Research & Development Funding on Scientific Productivity: Academic Chemistry, 1990-2009.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rosenbloom JL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4570780 | biostudies-literature | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Effects of Research & Development Funding on Scientific Productivity: Academic Chemistry, 1990-2009.
Rosenbloom Joshua L JL Ginther Donna K DK Juhl Ted T Heppert Joseph A JA
PloS one 20150915 9
This article examines the relationship between Research & Development (R&D) funding and the production of knowledge by academic chemists. Using articles published, either raw counts or adjusted for quality, we find a strong, positive causal effect of funding on knowledge production. This effect is similar across subsets of universities, suggesting a relatively efficient allocation of R&D funds. Finally, we document a rapid acceleration in the rate at which chemical knowledge was produced in the ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:In this paper, we estimate the impact of receiving an NIH grant on subsequent publications and citations. Our sample consists of all applications (unsuccessful as well as successful) to the NIH from 1980 to 2000 for standard research grants (R01s). Both OLS and IV estimates show that receipt of an NIH research grant (worth roughly $1.7 million) leads to only one additional publication over the next five years, which corresponds to a 7 percent increase. The limited impact of NIH grants is consistent with a model in which the market for research funding is competitive, so that the loss of an NIH grant simply causes researchers to shift to another source of funding.
| S-EPMC3156466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Research Project Grant (R01) is the oldest grant mechanism used by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Receiving an R01 award is often taken as a sign of scientific success. We presented normative data on multiple productivity and impact metrics for a more objective assessment of funded grants' scientific success.MethodsAll initial R01 grants awarded by NIH in the year 2000 were prospectively followed and evaluated using the numbers of publications and citations, as well as the h-indices at the grant level. We examined the variability, time trends, and relations among these metrics to better understand the funded projects' cumulative output and impact.ResultsIn the 20 years since initial funding, 4451 R01 grants generated a total of 55,053 publications. These publications were cumulatively cited 3,705,553 times over 736,811 citation years. The median number of publications was 8 (25th, 75th percentiles 4, 17) per grant for the entire 20-year duration. The median number of citations and the median h-index were 441 (25th, 75th percentiles 156, 1061) and 7 (25th, 75th percentiles 4, 13) per grant, respectively. The time courses of publication, citation, and accumulation of h-index were highly variable among the awarded grants. Although the metrics were correlated within an award, they reflected the grant's success in different domains.ConclusionNumbers of publications, citations, and h-indices vary greatly among funded R01 grants. When used together, these metrics provide a more complete picture of the productivity and long-term impact of a funded grant.
| S-EPMC8738817 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The challenge of research funding constraints has brought to bear enormous pressure on researchers. Research productivity is relevant to prestige and career progression of academic staff. However, this study aimed to explore significant challenges associated with researchers' productivity and the impact of non-funding of research in Nigerian research and tertiary institutions. Methods: This study adopted a qualitative exploratory design involving academics at various research and tertiary institutions across the six geographical regions in Nigeria. A semi-structured questionnaire was distributed electronically to all participants who consented to take part in this study. Exactly 4,159 questionnaires were administered and 2,350 were completely filled and returned. Pearson correlation matrices with logistic regression were used for data analysis and are presented in frequencies and percentages. Results: On challenges faced by respondents, 42.98% reported a lack of research funding, 17.11% mentioned brain drain challenge while 8.85% indicated a lack of motivation. Of the 23,927 publications reported, the number of those in sciences, engineering, and medical sciences averaged 9.6, 11.5, and 9.5 respectively. The average number of publications by women (10.8) was more than by men (9.7). Lecturers had the highest average research publication number (11.8) followed by researchers (10.2) and others (3.9). Men had the highest (11.9) average number of conferences compared to women (9.2). Participants in engineering had an average number of 13.8 conferences per respondents followed by those in education (11.2), sciences (11.1), and 10.9 for those in agricultural sciences. The result revealed a negative significant correlation between research publication and academic qualification at p < 0.01. Positive significant correlation was observed between research productivity and discipline at p < 0.05. Findings show that the combined influence of the independent variables on research productivity was significant using linear regression analysis. Conclusions: The failure to prioritize research has resulted in underdevelopment in Nigeria. It is therefore imperative that the federal government prioritize research and establish a functional Special Research Trust Fund to oversee research funding in Nigeria.
| S-EPMC8596491 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Disruptive advancements in science and technology often rely on new ideas and findings, which in turn brings us to focus on the value of novelty in scholarly activities. Using Web of Science publication data from European regions for the period between 2008 and 2017, this study examines, first, the impact of scientific collaboration on novelty of research. Here, five levels of collaboration are considered for each article-country, three levels of regions, and institutions, and novelty is measured with keywords information. Second, we investigate both the effect and moderating effect of research funding on novelty. Our findings show that there is a negative and significant relationship between scientific collaboration and novelty. Furthermore, funded papers show lower novelty than the unfunded, but funding does have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between collaboration and novelty. This study contributes by linking diverse levels of collaboration and funding sources to article's novelty and thus extending the scope of bibliometric research of publications.
| S-EPMC9312390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction Global surgery has become the undisputed starting point for addressing a myriad of problems in surgery today. Therefore, it is necessary to constantly evaluate the scientific productivity in surgery, its behavior, validity and impact. In Latin America, specifically in Colombia, there are no studies that have analyzed this production. Methods A retrospective cross-sectional bibliometric study was carried out, in which the Colombian Ministry of Science database was consulted with the validated results up to July 2021. In the search section for research groups, the key word “Surgery” was used, and all associated GrupLAC (platform where the information of the research groups can be found) and their registered products were reviewed. Results 40 groups were included. Only 5 (12.5%) were registered in surgery as main line of research. The great majority of the groups were in the medium-low category, 50% in category C and 22.5% in category B. The vast majority of surgical groups are located in Bogotá (19; 47.5%). The first surgery group in the country was created in 1994 and the last one in 2017. In 27 years of surgical research, a total of 4121 registered scientific articles were found, 83 books, 713 book chapters, 2891 products associated with participation in scientific events, 1221 theses directed, and 1670 projects in colombian surgical research groups. There was evidence of a high rate of underreporting of data, due to duplication of products and incomplete registration of data. Conclusions There is a high rate of underreporting of products and data in the GrupLAC of Colombian surgical research groups. Most of the production is located in the Andes region (Antioquia, Valle del Cauca and Bogotá), and is predominantly composed of scientific articles and products associated with participation in scientific events. Highlights • There is a high rate of underreporting of data in the Colombian surgical research groups.• Most of the production is composed of articles and participation in scientific events.• Surgical production in Colombia is centralized in the Andean region.
| S-EPMC9142555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIndustry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity.Materials/methodsCMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models.ResultsA total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75% received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1%) individuals received $6,425,728 (51%) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001).ConclusionThere is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted.
| S-EPMC9627577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Crowdfunding has gained traction as a mechanism to raise resources for entrepreneurial and artistic projects, yet there is little systematic evidence on the potential of crowdfunding for scientific research. We first briefly review prior research on crowdfunding and give an overview of dedicated platforms for crowdfunding research. We then analyze data from over 700 campaigns on the largest dedicated platform, Experiment.com. Our descriptive analysis provides insights regarding the creators seeking funding, the projects they are seeking funding for, and the campaigns themselves. We then examine how these characteristics relate to fundraising success. The findings highlight important differences between crowdfunding and traditional funding mechanisms for research, including high use by students and other junior investigators but also relatively small project size. Students and junior investigators are more likely to succeed than senior scientists, and women have higher success rates than men. Conventional signals of quality-including scientists' prior publications-have little relationship with funding success, suggesting that the crowd may apply different decision criteria than traditional funding agencies. Our results highlight significant opportunities for crowdfunding in the context of science while also pointing towards unique challenges. We relate our findings to research on the economics of science and on crowdfunding, and we discuss connections with other emerging mechanisms to involve the public in scientific research.
| S-EPMC6319731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To what extent are academics entrepreneurial, and to what extent does an entrepreneurial orientation contribute to higher research productivity in higher education? According to some schools of thought, academic research is conducted within 'paradigms' or circumscribed areas of study, with the implication that certain research might not be inherently innovative. This research sought to investigate the extent to which individuals with higher self-reported levels of entrepreneurial orientation (EO), as well as the propensity to apply novel technological methods (such as crowdfunding and crowdsourced R&D) in their research, have higher levels of research productivity. Applying a comprehensive purposive sampling process, a large South African university was sampled. A total of 292 usable responses were obtained, and these were analysed using ordinary least squares. In order to test the robustness of results, two further tests were applied, namely bootstrapping and negative binomial regression analysis. Findings suggest that individuals with higher endowments of entrepreneurial orientation may be more research productive. Interestingly, innovativeness is not found to be significantly related to academic research productivity. It is concluded that further synthesis between educational and entrepreneurship theory might offer useful insights for the improvement of societally important research productivity. It is also concluded, however, that novel technological methods such as crowdfunding may be underutilised in the academic context. Given the resource constraints faced by those in higher education, particularly in the developing-country context of this study, this underutilisation may point to important opportunities in the sector.
| S-EPMC6726877 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLimited knowledge and unclear underlying biology of many rare diseases pose significant challenges to patients, clinicians, and scientists. To address these challenges, there is an urgent need to inspire and encourage scientists to propose and pursue innovative research studies that aim to uncover the genetic and molecular causes of more rare diseases and ultimately to identify effective therapeutic solutions. A clear understanding of current research efforts, knowledge/research gaps, and funding patterns as scientific evidence is crucial to systematically accelerate the pace of research discovery in rare diseases, which is an overarching goal of this study.MethodsTo semantically represent NIH funding data for rare diseases and advance its use of effectively promoting rare disease research, we identified NIH funded projects for rare diseases by mapping GARD diseases to the project based on project titles; subsequently we presented and managed those identified projects in a knowledge graph using Neo4j software, hosted at NCATS, based on a pre-defined data model that captures semantics among the data. With this developed knowledge graph, we were able to perform several case studies to demonstrate scientific evidence generation for supporting rare disease research discovery.ResultsOf 5001 rare diseases belonging to 32 distinct disease categories, we identified 1294 diseases that are mapped to 45,647 distinct, NIH-funded projects obtained from the NIH ExPORTER by implementing semantic annotation of project titles. To capture semantic relationships presenting amongst mapped research funding data, we defined a data model comprised of seven primary classes and corresponding object and data properties. A Neo4j knowledge graph based on this predefined data model has been developed, and we performed multiple case studies over this knowledge graph to demonstrate its use in directing and promoting rare disease research.ConclusionWe developed an integrative knowledge graph with rare disease funding data and demonstrated its use as a source from where we can effectively identify and generate scientific evidence to support rare disease research. With the success of this preliminary study, we plan to implement advanced computational approaches for analyzing more funding related data, e.g., project abstracts and PubMed article abstracts, and linking to other types of biomedical data to perform more sophisticated research gap analysis and identify opportunities for future research in rare diseases.
| S-EPMC8600882 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Which academics are more productive? The "sacred spark" theory predicts that some researchers are innately more productive than others, while the theory of cumulative advantage argues that small initial inequalities accumulate to large differences in productivity over time. Using a virtually complete panel dataset of all academic psychologists found in German universities in 2019, including their career information and publications, we examine under what conditions male and female psychologists publish more peer-reviewed articles. The strongest predictor of this is prior experience in publishing peer reviewed journal articles, irrespective of other prior endowments. This relationship between earlier and later productivity is not strongly confounded by career stage, affiliation with elite institutions, receipt of third-party funding, or parenthood. The effect of prior publications on current productivity explains why female academic psychologists publish less than men do. While female psychologists publish 34% less than their male counterparts, this gap diminishes to 17% after controlling for prior publication experience. This lends supports to the theory of cumulative advantage, which explains overall differences in productivity over entire careers by the accumulation of minor initial inequalities to large outcome differences over time.
| S-EPMC11819567 | biostudies-literature