 |
|
Principles and Mechanisms
A Response to the Career Scientist Award Controversy
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55:17-18.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
THE CONTROVERSY over the proposal by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Rockville, Md, to limit their Career Scientist Award Program (K-05) brings into stark relief 6 important issues related to science policy for the field. It is also clear that within many of these issues there is broad agreement on principles, but less clarity about the mechanisms for implementing those principles.
REALITY
Despite the unprecedented growth in National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Md, research funding to academic departments of psychiatry (growing from $80.2 million in 1984 to $341 million in 1995),1 the past several years have seen a leveling off of these figures as well as a plateauing of NIMH research funds in general. The "steady-state funding" of NIH described by Harold Varmus, MD, in his Shattuck lecture several years ago2 is a stark reality that Steven E. Hyman, MD, and his staff at NIMH must face on . . . [Full Text of this Article]
QUALITY
DEVELOPMENT
CHANGE
APPEARANCES
MENTORSHIP
CONCLUSIONS
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
On Preserving the National Institute of Mental Health Career Scientist Award
Philip S. Holzman, David J. Kupfer, and Nancy C. Andreasen
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):12-14.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Not-So-Special K's: Let's Limit K-05 Awards
Eric J. Nestler
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):15-16.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The National Institute of Mental Health Career Scientist Awards
Ross J. Baldessarini
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):19-20.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The K-05 Award Controversy
Steven E. Hyman
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):21-22.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
