PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Lutrick, Karen
AU  - Ilardo, Joan
AU  - Foss, Randy
TI  - Changes in Family Medicine Department Research Funding Between 2016 and 2021
AID  - 10.1370/afm.22.s1.5923
DP  - 2024 Nov 20
TA  - The Annals of Family Medicine
PG  - 5923
VI  - 22
IP  - Supplement 1
4099  - http://www.annfammed.org/content/22/Supplement_1/5923.short
4100  - http://www.annfammed.org/content/22/Supplement_1/5923.full
SO  - Ann Fam Med2024 Nov 20; 22
AB  - Context In 2016 and 2021, ADFM sent out a survey to departments of Family Medicine to understand research activities.Objective Identify changes in research capacity of family medicine departments between the years of 2016 and 2021.Study Design Secondary data analysis.Analysis To identify changes in research capacity of family medicine departments from 2016 to 2021, we compared the responses for the 39 institutions that responded to both surveys.Setting or Dataset Association of Departments of Family Medicine (ADFM) membersPopulation Studied Departments of Family MedicineIntervention/Instrument Council of Academic Family Medicine (CAFM) Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey from 2016 and 2021.Outcome Measures Responses from the 39 institutions that responded to both the 2016 and 2021 surveys were included in the analysis. The 2021 survey included fewer research-related questions, so only the following questions were included in our analysis: 1) Number of research faculty; 2) Type of outside research funding; 3) Amount of outside research funding; and 4) Self-rated research level.Results For the self-rated research level, four departments rated themselves as extensive in both 2016 and 2021. More departments rated themselves as moderate in 2021 (n=22, an increase of six). Within-department change showed 23% of the departments reported an increase, 13% a decrease, and 64% no change. While 43% of the departments reported no change in the number of research faculty in the department, 37% reported a decrease, and 17% reported an increase. Specifically looking at NIH funding, 65% of the departments reported no change in the number of NIH awards and 48% reported no change in NIH funding amount. Eighteen percent (18%) reported an increase in the number of NIH awards and 35% increased the actual amount received by the NIH over the five-year period. AHRQ-specific funding increased for 13% of the departments and decreased for 5%. There was also a change in overall funding sources, with 53% of the departments reporting they increased the number of agencies from which they received funding between 2021 and 2016. Twenty-seven percent (27%) received funding from fewer agencies.Conclusions Research related to efficacious care is of paramount importance. It is imperative that there be growth in conducting rigorous outcomes research. To track its progress, it would be methodologically sound to use the 2016 instrument to gather longitudinal data.