The new face of US science

Heggeness, Misty L.; Gunsalus, Kearney T. W.; Pacas, José; McDowell, Gary S.

doi:10.1038/541021a

Cited by 48 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The private sector, which includes biotechnology firms, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies, pays higher average salaries than academic positions (and is a likely driver for that growth). The majority of the biomedical workforce is under 45 years of age, ranging from 64% in 2002 to 55% in 2013 (3). This young biomedical workforce often has children at home, with 82% of married researchers age 40 to 49 years having children in their household (3).…”

Section: Diversity Of the Biomedical Workforcementioning

confidence: 99%

Diversification in the medical sciences fuels growth of physician-scientists

Carethers¹

2019

Journal of Clinical Investigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Diversity Of the Biomedical Workforcementioning

confidence: 99%

Diversification in the medical sciences fuels growth of physician-scientists

Carethers¹

2019

Journal of Clinical Investigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, without reported data on these demographics, and relying purely on predictive algorithms, we encountered limitations on the ability to pursue such an analysis. We strongly encourage others asking such questions in this space to consider whether there are differences between foreign-born researchers (who comprise approximately two-thirds of the U.S. biomedical postdoc population (Garrison et al, 2005) , and more than half of the U.S. biomedical workforce as a whole) as well as researchers from underrepresented populations, to examine whether differences in postdoc salaries at institutions arise due to these variables (Heggeness et al, 2016(Heggeness et al, , 2017 .…”

Section: Limitations Of This Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Landscape of U.S. Postdoctoral Salaries

Athanasiadou¹,

Bankston²,

Carlisle³

et al. 2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Postdocs make up a significant portion of the biomedical workforce. However, data about the postdoctoral position are generally scarce, including salary data. The purpose of this study was to request, obtain and interpret actual salaries, and the associated job titles, for postdocs at U.S. public institutions. Methodology:Freedom of Information Act Requests were submitted to U.S. public institutions estimated to have at least 300 postdocs according to the National Science Foundation's Survey of Graduate Students and Postdocs. Salaries and job titles of postdoctoral employees as of December 1st, 2016 were requested.Findings: Salaries and job titles for over 13,000 postdocs at 52 public U.S. institutions and 1 private institution around the date of December 1st, 2016 were received, and individual postdoc names were also received for approximately 7,000 postdocs. This study shows evidence of gender-related salary discrepancies, a significant influence of job title description on postdoc salary, and a complex relationship between salaries and the level of institutional NIH funding.Value: These results provide insights into the ability of institutions to collate actual payroll-type data related to their postdocs, highlighting difficulties faced in tracking, and reporting data on this population. Ultimately, these types of efforts, aimed at increasing transparency, may lead to improved tracking and support for postdocs at all U.S. institutions.

show abstract

“…The career path that we arguably have the most information about is the one that leads to an academic faculty career. Competition is fierce: nearly 80 percent of newly minted biomedical Ph.D.s enter a postdoctoral research position and more than half of these new postdocs intend to pursue a faculty position, despite this being far more postdocs than there are faculty slots [9][10][11]. Securing an F32 postdoctoral fellowship or a K-series mentored career development award from the National Institutes of Health can increase a candidate's chances of securing a faculty position and future funding, while having high-profile publications can be a predictor of success on the faculty track [12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Securing an F32 postdoctoral fellowship or a K-series mentored career development award from the National Institutes of Health can increase a candidate's chances of securing a faculty position and future funding, while having high-profile publications can be a predictor of success on the faculty track [12][13][14]. Postdocs also face a series of non-research related obstacles while trying to satisfy research requirements, including relatively low pay, decreased time for families and dimmed earnings prospects [11,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Increasing Importance of Fellowships and Career Development Awards in the Careers of Early-Stage Biomedical Academic Researchers

Pickett

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excessive competition for biomedical faculty positions has ratcheted up the need to accumulate some mix of high-quality publications and prestigious grants to move from a training position to university faculty. How universities value each of these attributes when considering faculty candidates is critical for understanding what is needed to succeed as academic faculty. In this study I analyzed publicly available NIH grant information to determine the grants first-time R01 (FTR01) awardees held during their training period. Increases in the percentage of the FTR01 population that held a training award demonstrate training awards are becoming a more common aspect of a faculty candidate's resume. The increase was largely due to an expansion of NIH K-series career development awards between 2000 and 2017. FTR01 awardees with a K01, K08, K23, or K99 award were overrepresented in the top half of institutions, whereas FTR01 awardees with F32 fellowships and those with no training award were evenly distributed across institutions. Finally, training awardees from top institutions were overrepresented in the faculty of the majority of institutions, echoing data from other fields where a select few institutions supply an overwhelming majority of the faculty for the rest of the field. These data give important insight into how trainees compete for NIH funding and faculty positions and how institutions prefer those with or without training awards.

show abstract

The new face of US science

Cited by 48 publications

References 9 publications

Diversification in the medical sciences fuels growth of physician-scientists

Diversification in the medical sciences fuels growth of physician-scientists

Assessing the Landscape of U.S. Postdoctoral Salaries

The Increasing Importance of Fellowships and Career Development Awards in the Careers of Early-Stage Biomedical Academic Researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About