Does NIH Favor Mediocrity over Meritocracy? | GenomeWeb

A commentary published in Nature this week argues that the National Institutes of Health is not meeting its mandate to fund "the best science, by the best scientists."

Indeed, based on an analysis of 1,380 papers published since 2001 that have received 1,000 citations or more — a "proxy" measurement for the influence of the work — the authors found that "three out of five authors of these influential papers do not currently have NIH funding as principal investigators."

Get the full story

This story is free
for registered users

Registering provides access to this and other free content.

Register now.

Already have an account?
Login Now.

Related Posts

For Success

'Customized Care'

Review of Peer Review

All About the Basics

In PLOS this week: genetic factors associated with facial features, a new mutation that makes individuals more prone to Brugada syndrome, and more.

Nutrigenomic companies offer gene-based diet advice, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Researchers have found a new kind of virus — one that starts out broken up into five parts.

Nature News explores the president's "science legacy."