Personnel Needs and Training for Biomedical and Behavioral Reserach 1976 Report (1976) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Introduction and Recommendations
1 Introduction and Recommendations
Pages 1-22
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
A ma jor national commitment was therefore made to support investigation in the biomedical ~d behavioral sciences in order to improve the health and wel3~-being of all citizens. The enormous growth in federal research support that ensued luring the two decades following the war led to the need for a corresponding cons itment to Me training of adequate numbers of qualified research personnel.
|
From page 2... ...
both the executive and legislative branches of government increasingly have sought to determine the level and kinds of research training support that are needed to meet national health need s. Recognizing the responsibility of the federal government to assess these needs while maintaining its vital role in supporting excel fence in research training, Congress passed the National Research Service Award Act of ~ 974 (URSA Act)
|
From page 3... ...
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 ma jor changes or ad justments 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 over constituents of the research training comxnur~ity, it would be best to maintain unchanged the mechanisms, categories, and support level s of federal funding of research training programs in each of the four aggregate fields identified above.
|
From page 4... ...
scientists, the Committee has also considered various tabulations and analyses of data f rom f iles maintained by the National Res earch Council ~ ~ For the analysis of the market for M
|
From page 5... ...
t2 All of these data have been useful in projecting employment requirements in the academic sector, but the inability to isoi ate selected subpopulations has made it impossible to separate healthrelated research positions from other employment opportunities in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. Information about alternative mechanisms for support of graduate training has been obtained from several sources.
|
From page 6... ...
Despi te the dif f iculties encountered in attempting to identify the population of health services researchers, the Committee believes that additional training support is warranted because of the increasing need for and emphasis on research in this area. THE FEDERAL ROLE AND TWINING QUALITY One of the original intents of federal support of research training was to augment the supply of researchers to meet the the n- growing demand .
|
From page 7... ...
y been heightened through the peer review system. The Committee believes that the federal responsibility for health research training goes beyond the simple assurance of access to graduate and postdoctoral trainings and exten ds to the provision of programs that are of a high level- of excellence in areas relevant to the national interest .
|
From page 8... ...
RECOMMENDAT IONS In this year' s report the Committee is making a number of recommendations for ad justments in the number of pr-doctoral and postdoctoral awards for research training in each of the four broad fields -- basic bion~ed~cal sciences, behavioral sciences, clinical sciences, and health services research-with respect to fiscal years 1976, ~ 977, and 1978. Because of the differences among these four fields, recommendations with re specs to each are di scussed separately.
|
From page 9... ...
For Fredoctoral candidates, the Committee concludes that funding by the training grant mechanism represents the most appropriate f own of f ederal res earch training support. In contrast, for postOc~ctora' students, the recommendation is that the ma jority shoul ~ be funded through the fellowship progr am ~ T hi s mec hen i s m not onI y as sur es t hat h igh-qu a lity candidates are selected through the national peer review process, but that rapid adjustments can be made in response to res earch opportunities in various areas.
|
From page 10... ...
Concerning the use of training grants and f ellowships, the Committee concludes that for both predoctoral and postdoctoral students federal funding should remain at approximately the current ratio of traineeships to fellowships (82 percent training grants and 18 percent fellowshi ps} . While the recommendation that postdoctoral trainer in the behavioral sciences should be conducted largely through training grants may appear inconsistent with the Committee' s strong endorsement of the fell ow strip mechanism for postdoctoral training in basic biomedical research, different circumstances in the behavioral sciences cad ~ for a dif ferent approach.
|
From page 11... ...
I? urther~nore, in view of the growing need for interdisciplinary training, the Committee believes that the formation of postdoctoral training programs by the faculties of training institutions wall offer the necessary organization of innovative research training experiences for postdoctoral behavioral scientists at this time.
|
From page 12... ...
In addition, both agencies provide training in a number of basic biomedical and behavioral sciences disciplines, such as epidemiology. sociology, and biostatistics, whose methods are appropriate to health services research.
|
From page 13... ...
(See Appendix VII for announcement s ~ ~ The Committee questions the va ~ idi ty of the distinction drawn by the NIE in its announcements between areas that are appropriate for training grants and areas that are appropriate for fellowships, since no 13
|
From page 14... ...
~ o as 0 c)
|
From page 15... ...
· -ret ~ ~ -me l 8 o - ~v ~ Jaq~n~ CO Ce ~ _ Cal — _ ~ _ _ ~ m:~: ~ ~ o C - = ., ACE ~ C w~ o_ :CG Cl _ L J it' Ispuesn.3~)
|
From page 16... ...
me average cost for a predoctoral fellow is S10, 000, including S3, 000 institutional allowance. The average cost.for a postdoctoral fellow is S14, 000, (except in the clinical sciences as .
|
From page 17... ...
THE TAS K OF ID~NTIFYING PRICRITY TWINING YEAS The Committee has carefully considered the broader congressional mandate to identify areas in biomedical and behavioral research that justify special emphasis for research training' either because they are emerging areas of significant promise, or because they represent important national needs not adequately emphasized at this time. The Committee recognizes the importance cuff the r<: le played by informed expert opinion In carrying cut this legislative charge.
|
From page 18... ...
Basic Biomedical Sciences The continuing availabil ity of an adequate number of inves tigators from existing training programs, the broad base of the training they have received, and the close relationship among many basic biomedical disciplines have led to a substantial degree of mobility between different disciplines. The impl ication of these findings with respect to designation of specialty areas for research training for predoctoral support is that important areas of research can be adequately staffed by personnel emerging under the existing types of training programs.
|
From page 19... ...
Clinical Sciences The Committee recognizes that important clinical advances often depend upon research in biomedical or physical sciences not original ly directed toward the diagnosis, treatment, car prevention of specific diseases. Neverthel ess, fur ~ application of basic knowledge to the so' ution of Cal inical probe ems often requires that additional personnel be trained for research in particular Cal inical fields after t hey have received their professional degree .
|
From page 20... ...
The Committee will carefully review the f inal report of this panel, and the public reaction to it, to determine whether additional areas of research should be designated for special emphasis with regard to appropriate petrels for research training.
|
From page 21... ...
; National Research Council, Survey of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers, ~ 973; and National Science Foundation, National Register of Scientific and Technical Personnel, 1960-70 (biennial)
|
From page 22... ...
4. National Research Council, Survey of Earned Doctorates, 957-74 (annual} .
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.