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

Submit a comment

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

×

Guidelines

The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.

  • Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
  • Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
  • The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
  • No appeals will be considered.
  • Comments are not indexed in PubMed.

Specific requirements

  • Maximum length, 400 words
  • Entered as plain text or HTML
  • Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
  • Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
  • Comments may not include figures
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required

Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts