Estimated New Investigator Distribution for FY2014 by IRG

Dec 09 2014 Published by under Uncategorized

In a previous post, I examined the distribution of new investigators across NIH Institutes and Centers. I have now performed a preliminary analysis of these data as a function of NIH Integrated Review Groups (IRGs).

The percentages of estimated new investigators as a function of the total number of awards for each IRG is shown below along with the percentage of A0 awards among the funded grants and the percentage of Type 1 (new) awards are shown below:

IRG IRG % A0 % Type 1 % New Investigator
AIDS and Related Research AARR 38 79 26
Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes BBBP 33 73 36
Biological Chemistry and Macromolecular Biophysics BCMB 42 61 24
Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience BDCN 31 71 24
Bioengineering Sciences and Technologies BST 50 73 27
Cell Biology CB 47 54 18
Cardiovascular and Respiratory Sciences CVRS 38 70 24
Digestive, Kidney and Urological Systems DKUS 38 57 24
Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition, and Reproductive Systems EMNR 39 67 26
Emerging Technologies and Training Neurosciences ETTN 41 71 12
Genes, Genomes, and Genetics GGG 54 55 22
Healthcare Delivery and Methodologies HDM 43 86 42
Infectious Diseases and Microbiology IDM 41 64 29
Integrative, Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience IFCN 36 64 27
Immunology IMM 26 74 24
Interdisciplinary Molecular Sciences and Training IMST 57 71 37
Molecular, Cellular and Development Neuroscience MDCN 45 65 27
Musculoskeletal, Oral and Skin Sciences MOSS 41 70 27
Oncology 1-Basic Translational OBT 35 73 27
Oncology 2-Translational Clinical OTC 38 81 31
Population Sciences and Epidemiology PSE 39 84 30
Risk, Prevention and Health Behavior RPHB 19 94 26
Surgical Sciences, Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering SBIB 38 68 28
Vascular and Hematology VH 36 73 22
Special Emphasis Panels (All IRGs) SEP 58 76 23
MEAN 40 71 27
MEDIAN 39 71 26

 

The percentage of new investigators ranges from 12% to 42%. However, the 12% figure should be viewed with caution since relatively few R01 grants were funded in the ETTN IRG. Also, it is important to recall that these are "new investigators" and not necessarily "early stage investigators". Thus, the relatively high percentage of new investigators in the HDM IRG may represent investigators new to NIH rather than early stage investigators.

The three percentages (%A0, % Type 1, and % new investigators) might be expected to related to one another. The %A0 and % New Investigators are essentially uncorrelated. However, the %Type 1 and % new investigators are correlated (correlation coefficient 0.43) indicating that those IRGs that fund a higher percentage of Type 1 awards tend to fund a higher percentage of new investigators. This almost has to be true since an IRG that funds a higher percentage of Type 1 awards, funded a lower percentage of Type 2 (competing renewal) awards and Type 2 awards, by definition, do not go to new investigators.

No responses yet

Leave a Reply