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 195
SUPPLEMENT 1
HI STOFICAL OVERVIEW
This report is concerned with national needs for high-
quali~y research personnel in the biomedical and behavioral
sciences, with federal and other programs for research
training, and with program adjustments necessary to continue
providing a cadre of research scientists to meet the future
health needs of this country. Research training programs
must serve the fields with which such scientists are
related. This report endeavors to address these
relationships.
Historically, federal interest and involvement in
biomedical and behavioral research increased dramatically
after World War II, in large measure as a result of the
demonstration during this war of the immediate beneficial
impact of wel1-organized basic and clinical research. The
introduction of penicill in into the treatment of infectious
diseases was a striking example. It became clear that
expansion of the country' s research efforts was in the broad
rational interest because of its potential for improving
human health and we' fare. Congress concluded that
substantial federal funding was justified because of the
unique importance of health for all Americans. A major
national commitment was therefore made to support
investigation in the biomedical and behavioral sciences in
order to improve the health and wellbeing of all citizens.
The enormous growth in federal research support that ensued
during the two,decades following the war led to the need for
a corresponding commitment to the training of adequate
numbers of qualified research personnel.
Initially, the needed scientists were either attracted
from other fields or trained through the limited existing
postdoctoral support. It was clear, however, that
predoctoral support of graduate students would be needed in
order to assure a continuing increase in the supply of high-
quality researchers in these developing sciences. Hence,
training grant and fellowship support in the beginning was
directed primarily at augmenting the capability of the
educational system to supply additional researchers while
also seeking to improve the quality of their training. This
system, with the support of federal funding, rapidly
developed to the point where it now provides an adequate
supply of re search personnel equipped to carry out the
national research effort in many of the biomedical and
behaviors 1 f iel ds.
In view o f the recent le s sen ing rate o f f e dera ~
investment in biomedical and behavioral research, both the
executive and legis1 ative branche ~ of government
increasingly have sought to determine the level and kinds of
195
OCR for page 196
research training support that are needed to meet national
health needs. Recognizing the responsibility of the federal
government to assess these needs while maintaining its vital
role in supporting excellence in research training, Congress
passed the NRSA Act of 1974. This had as one of its primary
objectives the continued evaluation of the nation's needs
for biomedical and behavioral research personnel. The Act
directed the Secretary of the HEW to commission such a study
by the HAS, which accepted the task and in early 1975
established the present Committee.
The charge given to the Committee under the Act is a
formidab~ e one, covering a wide range of issues that over
many years and in many ways have been addressed by the
Cong He s s, the e xe cut ive branch, and va riou s pro f e s s tonal
organizations. In previous attempts to study national
health research manpower issues, investigators have stated,
and indeed, emphasized, the complexity and difficulty of the
task {Hational Board on Graduate Education, 1974~. In its
feasibility study (February 1975), an NRC committee pointed
out the complexities of the charge and, in concurrence with
the Congressional intent, indicated that a long-term
ccntinuing study would be needed to deal with these issues
satisfactory y. In the Act t the Committee is specifically
required to:
(11 establish (a} the nation's overall need
for biomedical and behavioral research -
personnel, (b) the subject areas in which
such personnel are needed and the number
of personnel needed in each area, and (c)
the kinds and extent of training which should
be provided f or such personne 1 ;
2 ~ a s s es s the current training pro grams
available for the training of biomedical
and behavioral research personnel,
including those supported by the NIH
and the ADAMHA as well as by other
sources;
(3) identify the kinds of research positions
available to and held by individuals
completing such training;
(4} determine to the extent feasible whether,
without NTH and ADAMHA research training
support, other programs could provide
training to an adequate number of
individuals to meet the nation's needs
established under item ~ above; and
i96
OCR for page 197
(5) determine what modifications in current
NIH, ADAMHA, and other available training
programs are necessary to meet these
needs.
In its 1975 report (NRC, 1975c), published only 4 months
after the feasibility study, the Committee began to address
the issues listed above. It divided the overall areas of
biomedical and behavioral research into four fields: basic
biomedical sciences, clinical sciences, behavioral sciences,
and health services research. However, because of the
complexity of the issues being addressed and the short time
available to collect and review data, the Committee stated
in that report that it did not have a sufficiently firm
basis upon which to recommend major changes or adjustments
within ongoing training support programs. The Committee
concluded, therefore, that until it could review and
evaluate both the existing data and the individual
viewpoints and judgments of its own members, and those of
its advisory panels and other constituents of the research
training community, it would be best to maintain unchanged
the mechanisms, categories, and support levels of federal
funding of research training programs in each of the four
aggregate fields identified above. Thus, while recommending
no changes, the Committee responded to the first two
mandates of the Act. With regard to the third task
specified in the Act, that of identifying the kinds of
research positions available to personnel who complete such
research training, the 1975 report presented a brief summary
of the employment activities of former NIH trainees and
fellows. For these data the Committee drew upon the results
of a prior study by another NRC committee of the impact of
NIH training programs on the career patterns of
bioscientists (NRC, 1976b} . Chapter IV of the 1975 report
addressed the Act's fourth mandate of whether NIH and ADAMBA
support of research training is required to meet the
nation's needs for research personnel. This was done by
examining data collected by the National Science Foundation
on other federal and nonfederal programs supporting graduate
science students. The impressions gained at that time from
this preliminary analysis, although informative, were not
conclusive and thus the issue requires further study.
These analytical tasks, though initiated last year, are
still basic to the Committees charge of assessing the
national needs for biomedical and behavioral research
personnel. Thus they constitute a core of continuing
studies that the Committee will reexamine each year as new
data are produced and as new developments take place in the
research environment.
197
OCR for page 198
FOOTNOTE
1. See supplement 2 for relevant sections of the NBSA Act
of 1974.
198
Representative terms from entire chapter:
training support