Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success
Shohini Ghosh-Choudhary, Neil Carleton, S. Mehdi Nouraie, Corrine R. Kliment, Richard A. Steinman
Shohini Ghosh-Choudhary, Neil Carleton, S. Mehdi Nouraie, Corrine R. Kliment, Richard A. Steinman
View: Text | PDF
Perspective Physician-Scientist Development Aging

Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

MD-PhD trainees constitute an important source of physician-scientists. Persistence on this challenging path is facilitated by success in garnering independent (R grant) support from the NIH. Published research tracks academic appointments and global R01 success for MD-PhD trainees but has not included information on future funding success of individual MD-PhD predoctoral grant holders. Here, we used data from the NIH RePORTER database to identify and track the funding trajectory of physician-scientists who received predoctoral grant support through the F30 mechanism, which is specific for dual-degree candidates. Male and female F30 awardees did not differ in their success in garnering K (postdoctoral training) grants, but, among F30 grant awardees, men were 2.6 times more likely than women to receive R funding. These results underscore the need for analysis of factors that contribute to the disproportionate loss of NIH-supported female physician-scientists between the predoctoral F30 and the independent R grant–supported stages.

Authors

Shohini Ghosh-Choudhary, Neil Carleton, S. Mehdi Nouraie, Corrine R. Kliment, Richard A. Steinman

×

Figure 4

F30-to-R award.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
F30-to-R award.
(A) Of n = 433 F30 awardees between 1990 and 2007, n = 6...
(A) Of n = 433 F30 awardees between 1990 and 2007, n = 65 men and n = 15 women went on to receive an R award in the 16.6-year median follow-up period. Overall median time to the start of the R award from the start of the F30 award was 14.2 years (13.6 years for men, 14.9 years for women). (B) In the time-to-event analysis, men were significantly more likely than women to secure R funding (P = 0.001, log-rank testing). (C) Of the 80 R awardees, 48 had received a prior K award; there was no difference in the median time to the receipt of R stratified on whether or not the recipient had a prior K award (P = 0.19). (D) Of the 48 R awardees that had a prior K (n = 38 men, n = 10 women), there was no difference in median time from K to R transition (defined as the start of K to the start of R) (P = 0.77). Displayed bars represent median with 95% CI.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts