PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Lucan, Sean C.
AU  - Phillips, Robert L.
AU  - Bazemore, Andrew W.
TI  - Off the Roadmap? Family Medicine’s Grant Funding and Committee Representation at NIH
AID  - 10.1370/afm.911
DP  - 2008 Nov 01
TA  - The Annals of Family Medicine
PG  - 534--542
VI  - 6
IP  - 6
4099  - http://www.annfammed.org/content/6/6/534.short
4100  - http://www.annfammed.org/content/6/6/534.full
SO  - Ann Fam Med2008 Nov 01; 6
AB  - PURPOSE Family medicine is challenged to develop its own research infrastructure and to inform and contribute to a national translational-research agenda. Toward these ends, understanding family medicine’s engagement with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is important. METHODS We descriptively analyzed NIH grants to family medicine from 2002 through 2006 and the current NIH advisory committee memberships. RESULTS Grants (and dollars) awarded to departments of family medicine increased from 89 ($25.6 million) in 2002, to 154 ($44.6 million) in 2006. These values represented only 0.20% (0.15% for dollars) and 0.33% (0.22% for dollars), respectively, of total NIH awards. Nearly 75% of family medicine grants came from just 6 of NIH’s grant-funding 24 institutes and centers. Although having disproportionately fewer grant continuations (62% vs 72%) and R awards (68% vs 74%)—particularly R01 awards (53% vs 84%)—relative to NIH grantees overall, family medicine earned proportionately more new (28% vs 21%) and K awards (25% vs 9%) and had more physician principal investigators (52% vs 15%). Ten of the nation’s 132 departments of family medicine (7.6%) earned almost 50% of all family medicine awards. Representatives from family medicine were on 6.4% of NIH advisory committees (0.38% of all members); family physicians were on 2.7% (0.16% of members). CONCLUSIONS Departments of family medicine, and family physicians in particular, receive a miniscule proportion of NIH grant funding and have correspondingly minimal representation on standing NIH advisory committees. Family medicine’s engagement at the NIH remains near well-documented historic lows, undermining family medicine’s potential for translating medical knowledge into community practice, and advancing knowledge to improve health care and health for the US population as a whole.