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 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
THE COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION
This is the ninth report to Congress mandated by the National Research Service
Awards (NRSA) Act of 1974, but it is the first report submitted by the Committee on
Biomedical and Behavioral Research Personnel. Its predecessor, the Committee on National
Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Research Personnel, produced eight reports and was
then disbanded following a 1986 conference that is discussed below. The new committee
represented an opportunity for a fresh start, and its members and staff have adopted a
sharply different approach to the issue. In particular, this report moves toward a
substantially greater emphasis on qualitative issues than heretofore, especially with respect
to evaluating the merit of training programs and the productivity of individual careers.
This shift in direction reflects the strong recommendation of a panel of experts (see below)
but has been constrained by limited time and money: the committee has recommended a
program of research, but has been unable to implement it. A mechanism by which NIH can
get the work done is also recommended.
The current committee first met in December 1988. The time schedule required that
a draft report be completed by July 1989. As a result, the report differs from earlier
versions in ways that were undesirable, but unavoidable. One major departure from
previous committee efforts is the abandonment of a formal projection model for
physician/scientists. The committee felt that the existing data are inadequate to properly
define and track physician/scientists; without a historical data series it was impossible to
build a credible model. The committee has also had to forego any serious consideration of
dental, nursing, and health services research in the report, although it did commission the
caner on health services research that is contained in Volume III of this report. (Volume II
contains an updated and enlarged version of the set of tables that appeared as an appendix
of the 1985 report.) If the organization and timetable that are recommended for the 1993
report are adopted, these topics can be reintroduced in it.
· . .
In the time that it had, the committee elected to examine the educational process
that leads to doctoral degrees in biomedical and behavioral science (and to postdoctoral
study in some cases) and the role of NRSA training programs in it. Conclusions from this
examination are provided, beginning on page 3. The congressionally mandated analysis
and a new and broader projection of the labor market for biomedical and behavioral
scientists are described in Chapters 2 and 3. The committee gave greater emphasis to the
identification of a research agenda for filling gaps in knowledge needed for sound policy
decisions in this area. The committee was able only to sketch such an agenda, presented in
Chapters 4 and 5, which if implemented promptly should contribute to a particularly strong
1993 report.
The committee's examination of needed research owes much to an intensive
discussion of the subject that occurred during the Airlie House Conference on Research
Training (Warrenton, Virginia, November 24-25, 1986), sponsored by the Institute of
Medicine. The fruit of that conference was proposals for three major initiatives:
1. undertake in-depth evaluations of NIH-supported training programs;
2. develop improved measures of scientific productivity; and
OCR for page 2
3. improve the assessment of national needs for biomedical and behavioral
scientists.
The first two Airlie House initiatives, training program evaluation and productivity
analysis, represent an important concentration of the committee. Papers commissioned on
each topic are contained in Volume III. These papers form the basis of Chapter 4, which is
concerned entirely with these topics and represents an important innovation of the current
report.
The topics of program evaluation and productivity analysis are linked naturally by
the assumption that effective research training programs should have measurable
outcomes--namely, enriching research careers and increasing the volume and quality of
their output. Research with which to test this assumption in depth is recommended in
Chapter 5. The committee also makes the assumption that increased financial support of
graduate education, such as that for NRSA programs, yields both an increased number of
graduate students and an accelerated path to the doctorate."
i,
The program evaluations recommended by the committee are intended to get at
ssues beyond those of effective educational enhancement. They are intended also to
investigate potential negative impacts, such as the possibility that the programs reduce the
quality of students available for research assistantships or that the grants may not be used
to increase the number of qualified graduate students but, rather, to substitute for other
money that is then used for other purposes.
The third Airlie House proposal was to extend coverage of future reports beyond
the academic sector--the primary concern of earlier reports--particularly to include
industry and its burgeoning biotechnology subsector. This is done in Chapters 3 and 4.
The committee also examines the rapid changes in- sex and race/ethnic composition of the
biomedical and behavioral work force; these changes may have major implications for
training programs, labor supply, and the research process itself.
The committee's counts and projections of biomedical and behavioral scientists are
more comprehensive than in the past and represent an improvement over earlier
projections. However, the current model is still forced to make simplifying assumptions
that may be unrealistic but that are necessitated by inadequate information. For example,
the current model continues the assumption that the labor market for scientists is strictly
national, with no local or regional barriers. It is also assumed that any two individuals
with degrees in a given field can occupy any job in that field equally well. Mobility
among fields of science and into and out of science are taken into account in the models,
but are assumed to occur independently of economic or other field characteristics that
change over time. The committee did not devote extensive resources to an analysis of
postdoctorates because this issue has been thoroughly examined in the past and because
there has been very little change in the size of the postdoctoral pool in recent years.
Although the current model represents a distinct improvement, its assumptions merit a
closer and more critical empirical examination than was possible in the period of this
study.
iEmpirical evidence suggests that first-year graduate enrollments are positively
associated with total student support and starting wages and negatively associated with
total elapsed time to degree. See Joe G. Baker, "The Ph.D. Supply Crisis: A Look at the
Biomedical Sciences," paper given at the Western Economics Association Meeting, Lake
Tahoe, Nevada, June 1989. The influence of student aid on time to degree is examined in
Howard Tuckman, et al., On Time to the Doctorate, forthcoming from the National Research
Council.
2
OCR for page 3
Nevertheless, these labor market descriptions and projections have convinced the
committee that there is need for changes in the level of support in biomedical graduate
education. The projections played a weaker role than previously in determining the level of
support that the committee finally recommended. In prior reports, recommended levels of
support were fairly direct outputs of the models used, but in this report the
recommendations are products of the collective judgment of the committee, taking the
projections into account. For future committees, the recommended program evaluations
and related research should prove to be powerful supplements to the output of projection
models.
None of this should be taken to suggest that the previous committee ignored any of
the topics that we consider here. For example, the 1981 report contained a chapter on the
race/ethnic composition of the biomedical and behavioral work force, but sex was not
included. Both the 1983 and 1985 reports described ground-breaking surveys of scientific
employment in biotechnology firms. Instead, we believe that we have an evolving
perspective with a substantially greater emphasis on vital issues that determine the quality
of the biomedical and behavioral scientific work force.
FINDINGS
Under the terms of the NRSA Act and its directive to NIH, the committee was asked
to address several implicit or explicit research questions. The following summary of this
report is couched in the form of responses to seven questions.
1. What are the kinds, extent, and length of existing research training mechanisms in
biomedical and behavioral science?
There exists no complete inventory of the nation's training mechanisms for
biomedical and behavioral science. However, it is clear that they operate within
graduate and medical schools and consist mainly of traditional Ph.D. and M.D.
programs, with many special programs funded by external sources.
The major individual training mechanism is NIH, which awarded $238.8 million in
NRSA training funds in 1987. In addition to NIH, the Alcohol, Drug Abuse and
Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA) awarded $23.5 million, and the Health
Research Services Administration (HRSA) awarded $1.2 million in NRSA training
funds in 1987. These funds support a large array of training mechanisms, including
limited baccalaureate training, predoctoral and postdoctoral institutional grants and
fellowships, and career development programs for senior scientists. A historical
summary of NRSA support appears in Table 1, page 7.
2.
How do existing training mechanisms compare in efficiency?
Previous studies of NRSA research training found that program participants
performed better than nonparticipants in their subsequent research careers. The
design of these studies makes it impossible to determine whether the differences a
effects of the training programs or of the selection process. Data and
methodological improvements are needed for a true evaluation of the efficiency of
NRSA training programs. Even in the absence of systematic data, however, the
committee acknowledges inefficiencies in some training programs. In particular,
committee members affiliated with medical schools believe that the program of
study in M.D. research training programs is deficient in basic scientific content.
3
re
OCR for page 4
3. What is the current state of the labor market for biomedical and behavioral
scientists?
Biomedical scientists: Demand (job openings) has been growing relative to supply
(new Ph.D.s) since the early 1980s. Industrial employment growth is over twice the
rate of academic employment growth. The proportion of employed biomedical
scientists whose work involves primarily research and development (R&D) has
.
ncreasec ..
Clinical psychologists: Total employment of clinical psychologists has been growing
rapidly in the 1980s. The supply of new Ph.D. clinical psychologists has not kept
pace with this demand. However, only a very small (and declining) proportion of
employment is it&D-related; because of this, the committee gives very little
consideration to this field.
Nonclinical psychologists: The labor market for nonclinical psychologists in the
1980s has been in approximate balance. Employment of nonclinical psychologists is
dominated by the academic sector, which has had sluggish demand as a result of
falling enrollments. A substantial number of nonclinical psychology Ph.D.s have
switched fields to work as clinical psychologists, although this number should
decline as state certification requirements increase. The portion of nonclinical
psychologists who are involved in R&D work has been fairly stable at about 30
percent of total employment.
Other behavioral scientists: The labor market for other behavioral scientists
(anthropologists, sociologists, audiologists, and speech pathologists) has been fairly
stable in the 1980s; declines in annual job openings have been matched by declines
in Ph.D. production. Over 80 percent of these scientists are employed at colleges
and universities, where employment growth has averaged 4.2 percent annually. The
portion of other behavioral scientists involved in R&D has remained constant at
approximately 19 percent.
Clinical investigators: The number of NIH traineeships/fellowships for post-
professional research training of M.D.s has not increased as fast as health-related
R&D expenditures. The percentage of M.D.s who are principal investigators (PIs) on
NIH research grants has fallen, although the number of M.D. PIs has remained
constant for the last decade at between 1,700 and 2,000.
What is the expected future labor market for biomedical and behavioral scientists?
Biomedical scientists: Most new positions in biomedical science are expected to be
in industry. Unless demand growth falls considerably from historical levels and/or
enrollments and degree production increase dramatically, there is projected to be an
undersupply of biomedical Ph.D.s into the next century. The undersupply is
expected to be even greater in the R&D segment.
Clinical psychologists: An undersupply of new Ph.D.s in clinical psychology is
expected unless growth moderates considerably or degrees and enrollments increase.
However, most of this projected growth will be for counseling; future demand for
R&D clinical psychologists will be extremely small.
Nonclinical psychologists: The projected labor market for nonclinical psychologists
is characterized by approximate balance between supply and demand. However, the
strong market for clinical psychologists could draw off labor supply from the
nonclinical sector.
4
OCR for page 5
Other behavioral scientists: The labor market for other behavioral scientists is
projected to be characterized by supply and demand balance through the year 2000.
In the R&D sector, demand growth is projected to exceed supply growth by a modest
margin.
Clinical investigators: For all physicians, growth in supply is expected to exceed
that of demand by a large margin through the year 2000. For physician/scientists,
however, demand may continue to increase as national health R&D expenditures
increase.
5.
6.
7.
What is the current state and expected future state of the labor market in the
biotechnology industry?
Based on the results of our survey of biotechnology firms (see Appendix A), more
firms are having problems hiring scientists this year than last year. Over one-third
reported having labor shortages (vacancies for over 90 days) in the last year. Over
80 percent of biotechnology firms plan to maintain or increase current levels of
hiring, particularly those with postdoctoral training.
What are the numbers and conditions of women and minorities seeking careers in
biomedical and behavioral sciences?
Females have made tremendous strides in the biomedical and behavioral work force
in terms of levels of predoctoral support, Ph.D. degrees received, and postdoctoral
appointments. However, the labor force particpation of females in full-time science
continues to lag behind males.
The number of minority scientists, on the other hand, has experienced very little
change in status in recent years and continues to lag behind by almost every
measurement of participation in science. Given the strong commitment of NIH and
ADAMHA to increase the numbers of minority scientists, of particular concern was
the finding that minorities are underrepresented in predoctoral support by NIH.
Reasons for this underrepresentation are unclear.
What data resources need to be maintained or established to carry out the necessary
analyses for this study?
Several data sets have been essential to the conduct of this study, including the
following: Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED); Survey of Doctorate Recipients
(SDR); Information for Management, Planning, Analysis and Coordination (IMPAC);
the Trainee Fellow File (TFF); and Consolidated Grant Application File (CGAF).2
As vital as they are to the work of this committee, however, they are flawed in a
number of ways. More important than the flaws is their incompleteness. Only the
SDR provides career outcome measures, for example, and the sample size of the SDR
is too small to permit accurate inferences about outcomes of particular sets of
trainees. The committee has proposed a continuing program evaluation data matrix
that would provide more adequate information.
2The SED is a continuing survey of doctoral candidates administered by the graduate
schools at the time of completion of all requirements for the doctoral degree. The SDR is a
biennial sample survey of doctoral scientists that focuses on many aspects of the career.
The IMPAC and CGA files are maintained by NIH, the former concerned with research
grant and training programs and that NIH/ADAMHA administers and the latter with
research grant applicants.
s
OCR for page 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
NRSA Support Levels
The committee's recommendations for levels of NRSA training support are
summarized in Table 1-.
Biomedical sciences: The committee projects that growth in demand will
exceed that in supply through the year 2000. The committee recommends
that the level of predoctoral support be 5,200 full-time equivalent positions
(FTEPs), up from the current level of 3,681. To shorten the time to degree
and to reduce graduate student attrition, the committee suggests that NIH
examine the potential effectiveness of a support program tailored
specifically for student support during the thesis-writing stage. The
committee also recommends that postdoctoral support be increased gradually
as degree production increases.
Behavioral sciences: The committee projects that the labor market for
behavioral scientists will be fairly stable. The committee recommends that
the level of behavioral science predoctoral and postdoctoral support be kept
at their current levels of approximately 500 and 420 FTEPs, respectively.
Given the low level of research involvement by clinical psychologists, the
committee recommends moving support away from clinical psychology and
towards nonclinical psychology and other behavioral sciences.
Clinical sciences: The committee expects that the demand for
physician/scientists will increase in the future as health-related R&D
increases, but in the absence of compelling data, this is speculative. Given
the lack of data about supply/demand and questions about the effectiveness
of physician research training, the committee recommends that the number
of trainee and fellow positions for M.D. investigator training remain
essentially the~same until current training programs are evaluated.
O Health services research: This interdisciplinary activity requires individuals
trained in a variety of fields, including not only medicine but also
economics, public health, sociology, statistics, psychology, and other natural
and social sciences. Given the potential for increased demand for scholars in
health services research, the committee recommends that research training
for biomedical, behavioral, and M.D. scientists in this field be increased. The
current funding mechanism for NRSA health services research training
allocates one-half of 1 percent of NIH's NRSA budget to HRSA for research
training.
In order to support the recommended increases in NRSA research training, the 1987
NIH/ADAMHA/HRSA training budget of over $262.2 million would have to be increased
to approximately $282 million in 1990 and grow at approximately $10 million per
year to a 1993 total of $312 million.3 This represents a real growth rate of approximately
3.5 percent per year.
3These budget estimates are based on an average cost per trainee of $24,851 and fellow
of $25,920. These averages were computed using budget data from the NIH Data Book 1988,
Table 16, and the "ADAMHA NRSA Training Tables 1987," Table 1. Trainee/fellow data
are from Table I.1.
6
OCR for page 7
Tabl e 1 . Ca~ni ttee Recon~nendat i ons for NRSA Ful l -T ime Equi va lent Tra i ni ng Pos i t i ons, 1989-1995, and
Actual Full-Time Equivalent Training Positions, 1985-1987
Actual Recommended
. _ . . . ..
1985 1986 1987 1989 1990 1991_ 1992 1993 1994 1995
Biomedical 7741 7807 7387 7800 8200 8600 9000 9400 9400 9400
Predoctoral 4008 3856 3681 4000 4300 4600 4900 5200 5200 5200
Fellow 92 93 86 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Trainee 3916 3762 3594 3900 4200 4500 4800 5100 5100 5100
Postdoctoral 3733 3952 3707 3800 3900 4000 4100 4200 4200 4200
Fellow 1628 1817 1580 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1800 1800
Trainee 2106 2135 2127 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 2400 2400
971 962 924 920 920 920 920 920 920 920
Predoctoral 530 515 504 500 500 500 500 500 500 500
Fel low 40 33 37 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Trainee 490 482 467 460 460 460 460 460 460 460
Postdoctora l 441 447 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420
Fel low 91 91 95 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Trainee 350 356 324 320 320 320 320 320 320 320
Cl inical 2195 2229 2157 2150 2150 2150 2150 2150 2150 2150
Predoctoral 632 687 654 650 650 650 650 650 650 650
Fel low 2 6 17 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
T ra i nee 630 681 637 640 640 640 640 640 640 640
MSTP 629 661 636 640 640 640 640 640 640 640
Other 1 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Postdoctoral 1563 1542 1503 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
Fellow 181 139 113 110 110 110 110 110 110 110
Trainee 1382 1403 1390 1390 1390 1390 1390 1390 1390 1390
Total 10907 10998 10468 10870 11270 11670 12070 12470 12470 12470
Predoctoral 5171 5058 4839 5150 5450 5750 6050 6350 6350 6350
Fellow 135 132 141 150 150 150 150 150 150 150
Trainee 5036 4925 4698 5000 5300 5600 5900 6200 6200 6200
Postdoctoral 5737 5941 5629 5720 5820 5920 6020 6120 6120 6120
Fellow 1899 2047 1788 1810 1860 1910 1960 2010 2010 2010
Trainee 383B 3894 3841 3910 3960 4010 4060 4110 4110 4110
HRSA (not include in above figures)
NA NA NA 77 79 81 83 85 85 85
. .
NOTE: ~
Actual appointments in 1987 were 12,041 (10,815 NIH and 1,226 ADAMHA). Appointments exceed FTE trainee/
fellow years (10,468 in 1987) because of partial-year appointments. Does not include short-term training
positions.
~ ~- 11~~ 1lUL a w sue to rounding. All figures are in full-time equvilalent trainee/fellow veers
SOURCE: Historical data are fr x Table 1-5.
7
OCR for page 8
Needed Research
o
o
o
o
o
Program of stucly for physician/scientist training: This committee recommends
that a conference, committee, or study be implemented to examine the
program of study for physician/scientist training supported by postdoctoral
institutional training grants. This investigation should focus on the potential
merits of including more exposure to basic science and scientists in these
· ~
tralolog programs.
Studies of recruitment and retention: We need far more comprehensive
knowledge than we have concerning factors that facilitate recruitment and
retention of able students at all stages of education leading to careers in
science. These studies should emphasize the recruitment and retention of
women and minorities.
Survey studies of former trainees with control groups: This should be a first
step in evaluating the relative efficiency of NIH training mechanisms. Study
populations should consist of cohorts of entrants to graduate school rather
than Ph.D. recipients. The committee recommends that the first two
programs to be evaluated in this fashion be the Minority Access to Research
Careers (MARC) and the Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP).
Studies of women and minorities: The academic pipeline for women is coming
more and more to resemble that for men in biomedical and behavioral
sciences. Evidently, NIH and other training programs are working
effectively, at least in terms of their recruitment and retention through the
doctorate. However, once into the career, the professional behavior of
women and men continues to differ in important regards, such as numbers of
papers published and citations received. The committee suspects, but lacks
data with which to show, that some of these differences result from
different experiences in graduate school. The committee lacks the evidence
. · . . . . . . —
on which to base concrete recommendations In this regard, but does suggest a
program of research that is intended to provide specific guidelines.
In the case of targeted minorities, recruitment and retention into careers in
biomedical and behavioral science remain worse than for whites. Little is
known about the careers of minority scientists; we can-only assume them to
resemble those of women more than those of white males. Again, the
committee lacks data with which to make concrete recommendations for
. .
intervention and can only recommend research designed to provide them.
NIH has several important recruitment programs, such as Minority Access to
Research Careers, but measurable changes in numbers of targeted minorities
are not yet being seen. Although there are several potential causes of this
lack of minority progress in biomedical and behavioral science, this could
suggest that these programs are ineffective. The program evaluations
proposed by the committee will make this determination possible.
Improvements in data and information: The committee also recommends a
number of specific improvements in the data sets needed to support more
rigorous future analyses.
Other Recommendations
o Interdisciplinary programs: To meet changing national priorities, the
committee urges NIH to continue to evolve its pre- and postdoctoral
8
OCR for page 9
programs, and we support the need for some of these programs to be inter-
disciplinary in nature (e.g., health services research).
o
NeecJ[ed organization with which to implement these recommendations: Given the
research and evaluation agenda detailed in this report, the committee
recommends that a new committee be activated no later than January 1992 in
order to allow two years for the preparation of the 1993 report.
9
OCR for page 10
Representative terms from entire chapter:
behavioral scientists
