For decades, receipt of multi-million $$ R01 @NIH grants has been crucial for med school research-focused faculty to gain promotion/tenure. **But this harms individuals & institutions** THREAD on why we must drop this “R01 Golden Ticket” mentality. (1/7)
Why is the #R01GoldenTicket a problematic promotion criteria? First, ⬇️⬇️ in NIH funding paylines has raised the bar ⬆️⬆️ over time. Success rates for R01 proposals were 25%-30%; now hovering far lower:
https://bit.ly/3u4JyRk  (2/7)
This scarcity of funds has predictable results:Recent analyses by Mike Lauer @NIHgrants @NIHDirector showed that fewer than half of NIH Career Development Grant Awardees (a highly selected population) had received an RO1 grant 10 years later.
https://bit.ly/3lzjD1a  (3/7)
The problem is not just that R01 funding is increasingly competitive. Its not a level playing field. Structural racism & sexism in science perpetuates inequity in @NIH funding. e.g. Black investigators systematically less likely to receive funding. https://bit.ly/3w8OZRa  (4/7)
Genuflecting at the alter of the #NIH R01 grant also perpetuates gender bias in academia, given inequity in peer review, research-"protected" time, and subsequent funding. #MedTwitter (5/7)
...and here is the kicker – there is poor relation between reviews/scores of (funded) R01 proposals and actual scientific productivity – either number of pubs, or citations. (6/7) #Medtwitter
https://elifesciences.org/articles/13323 
Do we need more NIH $$, more R01 grants? Sure. But lets change how we're evaluating faculty, to focus on their science, mentorship, collaboration. **Reward Impact** As is, we're stifling creativity, perpetuating inequity, and losing great scientists. #MedTwitter (7/7)
You can follow @cpgYALE.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: