skip to content
Covid-19 virus
COVID-19 Resources

Reliable information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) is available from the World Health Organization (current situation, international travel). Numerous and frequently-updated resource results are available from this WorldCat.org search. OCLC’s WebJunction has pulled together information and resources to assist library staff as they consider how to handle coronavirus issues in their communities.

Image provided by: CDC/ Alissa Eckert, MS; Dan Higgins, MAM
Does the NIH fund edge science? Preview this item
ClosePreview this item
Checking...

Does the NIH fund edge science?

Author: Mikko Packalen; Jay Bhattacharya; National Bureau of Economic Research,
Publisher: Cambridge, Mass. : National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018.
Series: Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research), no. 24860.
Edition/Format:   eBook : Document : EnglishView all editions and formats
Summary:
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) plays a critical role in funding scientific endeavors in biomedicine that would be difficult to finance via private sources. One important mandate of the NIH is to fund innovative science that tries out new ideas, but many have questioned the NIH’s ability to fulfill this aim. We examine whether the NIH succeeds in funding work that tries out novel ideas. We find that novel  Read more...
Rating:

(not yet rated) 0 with reviews - Be the first.

Subjects
More like this

Find a copy online

Links to this item

Find a copy in the library

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; Finding libraries that hold this item...

Details

Material Type: Document, Internet resource
Document Type: Internet Resource, Computer File
All Authors / Contributors: Mikko Packalen; Jay Bhattacharya; National Bureau of Economic Research,
OCLC Number: 1048259189
Notes: "July 2018"
Description: 1 online resource (23 pages, 2 unnumbered pages) : illustrations.
Series Title: Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research), no. 24860.
Responsibility: Mikko Packalen, Jay Bhattacharya.

Abstract:

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) plays a critical role in funding scientific endeavors in biomedicine that would be difficult to finance via private sources. One important mandate of the NIH is to fund innovative science that tries out new ideas, but many have questioned the NIH’s ability to fulfill this aim. We examine whether the NIH succeeds in funding work that tries out novel ideas. We find that novel science is more often NIH funded than is less innovative science but this positive result comes with several caveats. First, despite the implementation of initiatives to support edge science, the preference for funding novel science is mostly limited to work that builds on novel basic science ideas; projects that build on novel clinical ideas are not favored by the NIH over projects that build on well-established clinical knowledge. Second, NIH’s general preference for funding work that builds on basic science ideas, regardless of its novelty or application area, is a large contributor to the overall positive link between novelty and NIH funding. If funding rates for work that builds on basic science ideas and work that builds on clinical ideas had been equal, NIH’s funding rates for novel and traditional science would have been the same. Third, NIH’s propensity to fund projects that build on the most recent advances has declined over the last several decades. Thus, in this regard NIH funding has become more conservative despite initiatives to increase funding for innovative projects.

Reviews

User-contributed reviews
Retrieving GoodReads reviews...
Retrieving DOGObooks reviews...

Tags

Be the first.
Confirm this request

You may have already requested this item. Please select Ok if you would like to proceed with this request anyway.

Linked Data


\n\n

Primary Entity<\/h3>\n
<http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/oclc\/1048259189<\/a>> # Does the NIH fund edge science?<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:CreativeWork<\/a>, schema:Book<\/a>, schema:MediaObject<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nlibrary:oclcnum<\/a> \"1048259189<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nlibrary:placeOfPublication<\/a> <http:\/\/id.loc.gov\/vocabulary\/countries\/mau<\/a>> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:about<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/federal_aid_to_research<\/a>> ; # Federal aid to research<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:about<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/research_economic_aspects<\/a>> ; # Research--Economic aspects<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:about<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/research_grants<\/a>> ; # Research grants<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:about<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Organization\/national_institutes_of_health_u_s<\/a>> ; # National Institutes of Health (U.S.)<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:author<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Person\/bhattacharya_jay<\/a>> ; # Jay Bhattacharya<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:author<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Person\/packalen_mikko<\/a>> ; # Mikko Packalen<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:bookFormat<\/a> schema:EBook<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:datePublished<\/a> \"2018<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:description<\/a> \"The National Institutes of Health (NIH) plays a critical role in funding scientific endeavors in biomedicine that would be difficult to finance via private sources. One important mandate of the NIH is to fund innovative science that tries out new ideas, but many have questioned the NIH\u2019s ability to fulfill this aim. We examine whether the NIH succeeds in funding work that tries out novel ideas. We find that novel science is more often NIH funded than is less innovative science but this positive result comes with several caveats. First, despite the implementation of initiatives to support edge science, the preference for funding novel science is mostly limited to work that builds on novel basic science ideas; projects that build on novel clinical ideas are not favored by the NIH over projects that build on well-established clinical knowledge. Second, NIH\u2019s general preference for funding work that builds on basic science ideas, regardless of its novelty or application area, is a large contributor to the overall positive link between novelty and NIH funding. If funding rates for work that builds on basic science ideas and work that builds on clinical ideas had been equal, NIH\u2019s funding rates for novel and traditional science would have been the same. Third, NIH\u2019s propensity to fund projects that build on the most recent advances has declined over the last several decades. Thus, in this regard NIH funding has become more conservative despite initiatives to increase funding for innovative projects.<\/span>\"@en<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:exampleOfWork<\/a> <http:\/\/worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/id\/5380841116<\/a>> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:inLanguage<\/a> \"en<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:isPartOf<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Series\/working_paper_series_national_bureau_of_economic_research<\/a>> ; # Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ;<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:isPartOf<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Series\/nber_working_paper_series<\/a>> ; # NBER working paper series ;<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Does the NIH fund edge science?<\/span>\"@en<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:productID<\/a> \"1048259189<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:publisher<\/a> <http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Organization\/national_bureau_of_economic_research<\/a>> ; # National Bureau of Economic Research,<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:url<\/a> <http:\/\/www.nber.org\/papers\/w24860<\/a>> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nwdrs:describedby<\/a> <http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/title\/-\/oclc\/1048259189<\/a>> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n

Related Entities<\/h3>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Organization\/national_bureau_of_economic_research<\/a>> # National Bureau of Economic Research,<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Organization<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"National Bureau of Economic Research,<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Organization\/national_institutes_of_health_u_s<\/a>> # National Institutes of Health (U.S.)<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Organization<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"National Institutes of Health (U.S.)<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Person\/bhattacharya_jay<\/a>> # Jay Bhattacharya<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Person<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:familyName<\/a> \"Bhattacharya<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:givenName<\/a> \"Jay<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Jay Bhattacharya<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Person\/packalen_mikko<\/a>> # Mikko Packalen<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Person<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:familyName<\/a> \"Packalen<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:givenName<\/a> \"Mikko<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Mikko Packalen<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Series\/nber_working_paper_series<\/a>> # NBER working paper series ;<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nbgn:PublicationSeries<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:hasPart<\/a> <http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/oclc\/1048259189<\/a>> ; # Does the NIH fund edge science?<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"NBER working paper series ;<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Series\/working_paper_series_national_bureau_of_economic_research<\/a>> # Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ;<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nbgn:PublicationSeries<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:hasPart<\/a> <http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/oclc\/1048259189<\/a>> ; # Does the NIH fund edge science?<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ;<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/federal_aid_to_research<\/a>> # Federal aid to research<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Intangible<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Federal aid to research<\/span>\"@en<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/research_economic_aspects<\/a>> # Research--Economic aspects<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Intangible<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Research--Economic aspects<\/span>\"@en<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/experiment.worldcat.org\/entity\/work\/data\/5380841116#Topic\/research_grants<\/a>> # Research grants<\/span>\n\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Intangible<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\nschema:name<\/a> \"Research grants<\/span>\"@en<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n
<http:\/\/id.loc.gov\/vocabulary\/countries\/mau<\/a>>\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0a \nschema:Place<\/a> ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\ndcterms:identifier<\/a> \"mau<\/span>\" ;\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0\u00A0.\n\n\n<\/div>\n