Concerns have been raised about the career pipeline in academic medicine, including whether women with a demonstrated commitment to research succeed at the same rate as male colleagues.
To determine the subsequent academic success of recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) career development awards.
2784 of 2799 (99.5%) recipients of K08 and K23 awards for whom sex could be ascertained from the NIH Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects database and other publicly available sources.
Actuarial rates at which recipients of K08 and K23 awards from 1997 to 2003 went on to receive R01 awards. Sex-specific rates of R01 award attainment were calculated by using the Kaplan–Meier method, and sex differences were assessed by using a Cox proportional hazards model.
Overall, 31.4% of the 1919 K08 awardees and 43.7% of the 865 K23 awardees were female (P < 0.001). Women were less likely than men to receive an R01 award (P < 0.001). The actuarial rate of R01 award attainment at 5 years was 22.7% overall, 18.8% among women, and 24.8% among men. At 10 years, the rate was 42.5% overall, 36.2% among women, and 45.6% among men. Sex persisted as an independent significant predictor of R01 award attainment (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.92]; P = 0.002) in multivariate analysis controlling for K award type, year of award, funding institute, institution, and specialty.
Whether the lower rate of R01 award achievement among women is due to lower rates of application or lower rates of success in application could not be determined.
Only a minority of K awardees studied achieved R01 award funding during the period assessed, and a significant sex disparity was evident.
- 1. Leadley J, Magrane D, Lang J, Pham T. Women in U.S. Academic Medicine Statistics and Benchmarking Report, 2007–08. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; 2008. Accessed at www.aamc.org/members/gwims/statistics/stats08/stats_report.pdf on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
Nonnemaker L. Women physicians in academic medicine: new insights from cohort studies. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:399-405. [PMID: 10666431] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Jagsi R, Guancial EA, Worobey CC, Henault LE, Chang Y, Starr R, et al. The “gender gap” in authorship of academic medical literature—a 35-year perspective. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:281-7. [PMID: 16855268] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Tesch BJ, Wood HM, Helwig AL, Nattinger AB. Promotion of women physicians in academic medicine. Glass ceiling or sticky floor? JAMA. 1995;273:1022-5. [PMID: 7897785] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Guelich JM, Singer BH, Castro MC, Rosenberg LE. A gender gap in the next generation of physician-scientists: medical student interest and participation in research. J Investig Med. 2002;50:412-8. [PMID: 12425427] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
- 6. Office of Extramural Research. K Kiosk—NIH Extramural Training: Information about NIH Career Development Awards. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2009. Accessed at grants.nih.gov/training/careerdevelopmentawards.htm on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
Collins KA. The CRISP system: an untapped resource for biomedical research project information. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1989;77:8-14. [PMID: 2720218] MedlineGoogle Scholar
Bruce ML. Challenges to the transition to independent investigator in geriatric mental health. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2003;11:356-9. [PMID: 12724115] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
- 9. National Institutes of Health. NIH support to all institutions, fiscal year 2000. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2001. Accessed at report.nih.gov/award/trends/rnkall00.txt on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
- 10. Office of Extramural Research. Success rates of NIH competing applications by funding institute/center, mechanism, and activity code: FY 2007–1997. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2007. Accessed at report.nih.gov/award/success/Success_All_2007.xls on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
- 11. Office of Extramural Research. Women in Research: The Involvement of Women in NIH Extramural Research, Training, and Career Development Programs. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2008. Accessed at grants.nih.gov/grants/award/Research_Training_Investment/WOMEN_IN_RESEARCH_2.ppt on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
Ley TJ, Hamilton BH. Sociology. The gender gap in NIH grant applications. Science. 2008;322:1472-4. [PMID: 19056961] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Hamel MB, Ingelfinger JR, Phimister E, Solomon CG. Women in academic medicine—progress and challenges [Editorial]. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:310-2. [PMID: 16855274] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Carr PL, Ash AS, Friedman RH, Scaramucci A, Barnett RC, Szalacha L, et al. Relation of family responsibilities and gender to the productivity and career satisfaction of medical faculty. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129:532-8. [PMID: 9758572] LinkGoogle Scholar
Buckley LM, Sanders K, Shih M, Kallar S, Hampton C. Obstacles to promotion? Values of women faculty about career success and recognition. Committee on the Status of Women and Minorities, Virginia Commonwealth University, Medical College of Virginia Campus. Acad Med. 2000;75:283-8. [PMID: 10724319] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Brown AJ, Swinyard W, Ogle J. Women in academic medicine: a report of focus groups and questionnaires, with conjoint analysis. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2003;12:999-1008. [PMID: 14709188] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
- 17. Office of Extramural Research. Sex/gender in the biomedical science workforce. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2005. Accessed at grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/sex_gender/q_a.htm on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
- 18. Henderson L, Lee B, Marino A. Final Report on Three Focus Groups With Early Career Clinical Researchers About the K23 Award Program. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2001. Accessed at grants.nih.gov/training/k23_report.pdf on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
National Academy of Sciences. National Academy of Engineering. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Pr; 2006. Google Scholar
Babcock L, Laschever S. Women Don't Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ Pr; 2003. Google Scholar
Bland CJ, Schmitz CC. Characteristics of the successful researcher and implications for faculty development. J Med Educ. 1986;61:22-31. [PMID: 3941419] MedlineGoogle Scholar
Aisenberg N, Harrington M. Women of Academe: Outsiders in the Sacred Grove. Amherst, MA: Univ of Massachusetts Pr; 1988. Google Scholar
Sirridge MS. The mentor system in medicine—how it works for women. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 1985;40:51-3. [PMID: 3989206] MedlineGoogle Scholar
Levinson W, Kaufman K, Clark B, Tolle SW. Mentors and role models for women in academic medicine. West J Med. 1991;154:423-6. [PMID: 1877183] MedlineGoogle Scholar
Kaplan SH, Sullivan LM, Dukes KA, Phillips CF, Kelch RP, Schaller JG. Sex differences in academic advancement. Results of a national study of pediatricians. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1282-9. [PMID: 8857009] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Palepu A, Friedman RH, Barnett RC, Carr PL, Ash AS, Szalacha L, et al. Junior faculty members' mentoring relationships and their professional development in U.S. medical schools. Acad Med. 1998;73:318-23. [PMID: 9526459] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Ramanan RA, Phillips RS, Davis RB, Silen W, Reede JY. Mentoring in medicine: keys to satisfaction. Am J Med. 2002;112:336-41. [PMID: 11893387] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Ley TJ, Rosenberg LE. The physician-scientist career pipeline in 2005: build it, and they will come. JAMA. 2005;294:1343-51. [PMID: 16174692] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Solomon SS, Tom SC, Pichert J, Wasserman D, Powers AC. Impact of medical student research in the development of physician-scientists. J Investig Med. 2003;51:149-56. [PMID: 12769197] MedlineGoogle Scholar
Donowitz M, Germino G, Cominelli F, Anderson JM. The attrition of young physician-scientists: problems and potential solutions. Gastroenterology. 2007;132:477-80. [PMID: 17258744] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Dickler HB, Fang D, Heinig SJ, Johnson E, Korn D. New physician-investigators receiving National Institutes of Health research project grants: a historical perspective on the “endangered species.”. JAMA. 2007;297:2496-501. [PMID: 17565084] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Kotchen TA, Lindquist T, Miller Sostek A, Hoffmann R, Malik K, Stanfield B. Outcomes of National Institutes of Health peer review of clinical grant applications. J Investig Med. 2006;54:13-9. [PMID: 16409886] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
- 33. Association of Professors of Medicine. Recommendations for Revitalizing the Nation's Physician-Scientist Workforce. Washington, DC: Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine; 2007. Accessed at www.im.org/PolicyAndAdvocacy/PolicyIssues/Research/PSI/Documents/APM%20PSI%20Report.pdf.pdf on 16 October 2009. Google Scholar
Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
From the University of Michigan and Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Grant Support: In part by the American Medical Association's Women Physicians' Congress, through a grant from the Joan F. Giambalvo Memorial Fund.
Disclosures: None disclosed.
Corresponding Author: Reshma Jagsi, MD, DPhil, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, UHB2C490, SPC 5010, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5010; e-mail, rjagsi@med.
Current Author Addresses: Dr. Jagsi: Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, UHB2C490, SPC 5010, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5010.
Ms. Motomura: Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, 318 Campus Drive, Clark Center Room S170, Stanford, CA 94305-5444.
Mr. Griffith: University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Biostatistics Unit, SPC 0473, 8D15 NIB, 300 North Ingalls Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Ms. Rangarajan and Dr. Ubel: University of Michigan, Room 7C127, North Ingalls Building, 300 North Ingalls Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Author Contributions: Conception and design: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura, P.A. Ubel.
Analysis and interpretation of the data: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura, K.A. Griffith, S. Rangarajan, P.A. Ubel.
Drafting of the article: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura.
Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura, K.A. Griffith, P.A. Ubel.
Final approval of the article: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura, K.A. Griffith, P.A. Ubel.
Statistical expertise: K.A. Griffith.
Obtaining of funding: R. Jagsi.
Administrative, technical, or logistic support: R. Jagsi, P.A. Ubel.
Collection and assembly of data: R. Jagsi, A.R. Motomura, S. Rangarajan.