Hot Papers

Where do the authors of influential biological and biomedical research papers tend to get their financial support? A look at the "Hot Papers" noted by The Scientist during the past year can be revealing in this respect. In the last issue, The Scientist reported on the institutions and nations that produced the high-impact biological and biomedical articles featured in the "Hot Papers" column over the past 12 months (The Scientist, July 23, 1990, page 18). The 81 papers surveyed were selected from bimonthly reports generated by the Institute for Scientific Information in Philadelphia. To be selected as a "Hot Paper," each article had to have received an unusually large number of citations within 18 months of its publication. The next step was to identify the government agencies, private organizations, and industrial firms that supported this body of 81 influential, high-impact articles. In all, 66 of the 81 papers acknowledged a total of 178 grants. The other 15 papers did not specify any funding sources. The assumption in these cases is that the authors of these "Hot Papers" received support from the institutions that employ them. More than half the 178 grants listed (102) were awarded by various government agencies from about a dozen different countries, including the United States, Japan, West Germany, France, Canada, Brazil, Venezuela, Sweden, Australia, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Private agencies, universities, and industrial firms contributed the other 76 grants, or roughly 42 percent of the total (see accompanying chart). Table 1 lists the top grant-making government agencies named in this group of influential papers. The National Institutes of Health in the U.S. ranks first. It also ranked first in terms of the number of "Hot Papers" written by its scientists (The Scientist, July 23, 1990, page 18). NIH not only generates its own body of influential research, but also is instrumental in funding other scientists' "hot" research. NIH branch institutes awarded a total of 61 grants, for a 60 percent share of the government grants that backed "Hot Papers." Two other U.S. government agencies, the National Science Foundation and the Veterans Administration, also appear on the list. These two agencies, which awarded five grants each, were tied for second place with West Germany's Deutsche Forschungsgeimenschaft (the German Research Society, which provides financial and other forms of assistance for research) and Japan's Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture. France's Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (a government organization that allocates funds and conducts research at more than 1,500 laboratories) and the Medical Research Council of Canada awarded three grants each. Thirty-three private organizations contributed a total of 66 of the grants acknowledged by authors of last year's "Hot Papers," for a 37 percent share (see Table 2). The American Cancer Society (New York City), with 12 grants, ranked first. The Bethesda, Md.-based Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), a medical research organization, came in second with nine grants; and the Leukemia Society (New York City) ranked third with four grants. Three other private grant-makers tied for fourth place: the Clayton Foundation (La Jolla, Calif.), the American Heart Association (Dallas), and the Lucille P. Markey Charitable Trust (Miami) each contributed three grants. Twenty-seven other organizations contributed the remaining 47 percent of the grants. Although they provided the bulk of the funds for last year's "Hot Papers," government agencies and philanthropic organizations aren't the only source of financial support. Industry also supports academic scientists through various programs; the Bristol-Myers (New York City) Cancer Research Fellowship and the Ciba-Geigy (Basel, Switzerland) Fellowship programs, for example, were both listed as external funding sources. Scientists working in government or private research laboratories, in industry, and at universities also receive support from the institutions that employ them. This "institutional" support may be the source of funds for the 15 papers that did not list any grant information. Institutional support comes in a variety of forms, including salaries, materials, equipment, travel expenses, and lab space. In all, a total of 93 different universities, companies, private laboratories, and government facilities were listed on the 81 life sciences "Hot Papers" from the past year. Universities supported the greatest number of researchers (see Table 3), accounting for almost half of the institutional support for the authors of the 81 "Hot Papers." Independent research labs came in second place (26 percent share); industry ranked third (18 percent share); and government labs, notably those at NIH, ranked fourth (8 percent share). In general, the funding pattern for last year's "Hot Papers" in biomedical and biological sciences matched that of 1988-89 (The Scientist, May 15, 1989, page 14). Government institutions, notably NIH, accounted for the majority of the grants supporting the "Hot Papers" of 1988-89. HHMI and the American Cancer Society topped the 1988-89 list of private givers of grants. And universities came out on top in terms of institutional support for 1988-89. RankNamePercent 1. NIH (U.S.) 60 2. NSF (U.S.) 5 2. VA (U.S.) 5 2. Deutsche Forschungs-gemeinschaft (W.Ger.) 5 2. Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture (Japan) 5 3. CNRS (France) 3 4. Medical Research Council of Canada 3 5. 13 others 14 Total 100 RankNamePercent 1. American Cancer Society (U.S.) 18 2. HHMI (U.S.) 14 3. Leukemia Society (U.S.) 6 4. Clayton Foundation (U.S.) 5 4. American Heart Association (U.S.) 5 4. Lucille P. Markey Charitable Trust (U.S.) 5 5. 27 others 47 Total 100 RankTypePercent 1. Universities 48 2. Independent Research Labs 26 3. Industry 18 4. Government Labs 8 TOTAL 100

Hot Papers

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of