Items in cart [0] Questions? Call 888-624-8373

PAPERBACK list:$33.50 Web:$30.15 add to cart Rights & Permissions Free PDF Access Free Resources Sign in to download PDF book and chapters PDF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Display this book on your site! Related Titles Funding Biomedical Research Programs: Contributions of the Markey Trust Evaluation of the Markey Scholars Program Other Related Titles Bridging the Bed-Bench Gap: Contributions of the Markey Trust (2004) Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Page 22   E-mail  Facebook  Digg  Stumble  Twitter More Page 22 Front Matter (R1-R10) Executive Summary (1-5) Introduction (6-7) History of the Markey Trust (8-12) Grant Programs (13-18) Assessing the Markey General Organizational Grants Program (19-21) The Biomedical Research Environment in the 1980s (22-23) Closing the Bed-Bench Gap (24-31) The Current Biomedical Research Environment (32-34) Conclusions and Observations for Philanthropic Funders (35-39) References (40-42) Appendix A: Bridge Building Between Medicine and Basic Science (43-59) Appendix B: The Endangered Physician-Scientist: Opportunities for Revialization Emerge (60-68) Appendix C: Workshop on Training Programs in Patient-Oriented Pathobiology for Basic Scientists: Agenda (69-70) Appendix D: Workshop on Training Programs in Patient-Oriented Pathobiology for Basic Scientists: Participants (71-73) Appendix E: Descriptions of Programs Participating in the Workshop on Training Programs in Patient-Oriented Pathobiology for Basic Scientists (74-108) Appendix F: Summary of Site Visits to Markey-Funded Programs that Provided Training in Basic Research to Physicians (109-120) Appendix G: Biographies of Members of the Lucille P. Markey Charitable Trust Programs in Biomedical Sciences Committee (121-124)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 22
The Biomedical Research Environment in the ~ 980s Throughout the 1980s and 1990s many investigators continued sounding the alarm about the state of translational research. Like Wyngaarden, Gill (1984), Arias (1989), Hartwell (1992), Bunn and Casey (1995), Goldstein and Brown (1997), Shine (1998), and Nathan (1998), among others, expressed marked concern that a shortage of clini- cal researchers was endangering our nation's leading role in today's bio- medical revolution. A shortage of clinical researchers was clearly contrib- uting to a widening gap between those discoveries made in He basic science laboratories and the application of discoveries to conquer human diseases. Physician-scientists are key to bridging the gap since they relate to both human patients and laboratory research (Rosenberg and Ley, 2003~. In 1988 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to assess the availability of resources for per- forming clinical research. That study committee found that the number of highly talented young medical school graduates pursuing careers as clinical investigators was declining. As many as 20 percent of clinical traineeships and fellowships were filled by individuals with the Ph.D. degree rather than the M.D. degree (Institute of Medicine, 1988~. Follow- ing the release of the committee's report, Resources for Clinical Investiga- tion (Institute of Medicine, 1988), the IOM convened a planning meeting to develop a strategy for exploring problems associated with clinical re- search training. 22

OCR for page 23
THE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT IN THE 1980s 23 In the second half of the twentieth century the production of Ph.D.s in the life sciences increased substantially. In 1960 there were 1,160 doctor- ates awarded in the biological sciences (National Research Council, 1969~; by 1999 that number had increased to 5,600 (Sanderson et al., 2000~. In the past 20 years the advance of Ph.D.s into disease-oriented research has increased dramatically. In 1997 "the majority of principal investigators for clinical research projects supported by the NIH and me Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality held Ph.D.s (1,449) rather than M.D.s or M.D.-Ph.D.s (1,061~" (National Research Council, 2000, p. 42~. Despite the impressive numbers of Ph.D. scientists available to per- form clinical research, the development of training programs that specifi- cally prepare basic scientists for clinical research has been sporadic. Be- fore 1980 there was practically no systematic instruction of basic scientists in disease-oriented research. In 1980 Harvard Medical School began offer- ing a one-semester course in organismal physiology and disease mecha- nism to basic science students (Arias, 2003~. During the 15 years between 1984 and 1998, 214 predoctoral students, and postdoctoral fellows, and faculty participated in the one-semester course. In 1984 Irwin Arias began training basic scientists at Tufts University in pathobiology as part of an effort to bridge the gap between basic science and its application to medi- cine (Arias, 1989~.

Representative terms from entire chapter:

basic scientists