TRENDS AMONG BIOMEDICAL INVESTIGATORS AT TOP-TIER RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS - A STUDY OF THE PEW SCHOLARS

Citation
R. Williard et E. Oneil, TRENDS AMONG BIOMEDICAL INVESTIGATORS AT TOP-TIER RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS - A STUDY OF THE PEW SCHOLARS, Academic medicine, 73(7), 1998, pp. 783-789
Citations number
22
Categorie Soggetti
Medicine, General & Internal","Education, Scientific Disciplines","Medical Informatics
Journal title
ISSN journal
10402446
Volume
73
Issue
7
Year of publication
1998
Pages
783 - 789
Database
ISI
SICI code
1040-2446(1998)73:7<783:TABIAT>2.0.ZU;2-I
Abstract
Purpose. To gather information and opinions from promising young scien tists at top-tier research institutions to learn how they are being af fected by the changing biomedical research environment and to present highlights from some of the major reports in the literature on trends in biomedical education and employment in the United States. Method. I n 1996, the authors conducted a survey of all individuals who had been chosen as awardees in the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Scie nces between 1985 and 1995. This group was chosen because it represent s independently-identified highly successful investigators at tap-tier biomedical research institutions in the United States. Results. Overa ll, the members of the study group performed better than did their pee rs nationwide regarding time to degrees, ages at first position, and f irst awards of federal funding. Nonetheless, even within this above-av erage cohort, trends were identified that indicate a general aging of young scientists. Not surprisingly, members of this cohort had greater access to federal funds for training and were more likely to pursue c areers in academia than their peers nationwide. Despite the success of this well-positioned cohort of scientists, their views on the job mar ket, the supply of biomedical scientists, and the training of students were surprisingly pessimistic. Conclusion. The study findings provide information about early career paths of investigators at top-tier res earch institutions. In addition, the views of this successful cohort s erve to inform the current dialogue and questions that remain about th e future health of biomedical research and education in the United Sta tes. Educators, prospective and current students, and members of the p olicy community may find it.useful to consider these findings and the questions they raise, some of which the authors present.