Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2020.11.25.398339

Modeling Research Project Grant Success Rates from NIH Appropriation History: Extension to 2020

Abstract

Communication of the likelihood that a grant proposal is funded is important for individual researchers and academic institutions. For research project grants (RPGs) funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), this is measured by the success rate, the fraction of grants reviewed in a given fiscal year that are funded. In 2016, I posted a relatively simple computational model that allowed estimation of these success rates from historical data of NIH appropriations and associated data, based largely on the fact that commitments to fund NIH grants are typically made over four fiscal years rather than coming from a single fiscal years appropriations. Data for appropriations and success rates for fiscal years 2016-2020 are now available, allowing this model to be tested without no adjustable parameters. Over this period, the NIH appropriation increased by 29.7% to $39.313 billion, yet the RPG success rate increased from 0.183 to 0.201, a relative increase of only 9.8%. This difference is accurately reproduced by the model, indicating that the modest changes in success rate despite large appropriation increases reflect the consequences of the funding grants from multiple fiscal years and the response of the biomedical research community in submitting an increased number of proposals. The model can also be extended to estimate the success rates for individual institutes with reasonable accuracy.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Berg, J.. 2020-11-25. Modeling Research Project Grant Success Rates from NIH Appropriation History: Extension to 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.25.398339

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗

Welfare concerns for mounted load carrying by working donkeys in Pakistan

Working donkeys (Equus asinus) are vital to peoples livelihoods. They are essential for carrying goods, however globally, overloading is one of the primary welfare concerns of working donkeys. We studied mounted load carrying by donkeys and associated factors in Pakistan. A cross-sectional study of donkey owners (n = 332) was conducted, and interviews were undertaken based on a questionnaire. Owners estimated that the median weight of their donkeys was 110kg (interquartile range (IQR) 100-120kg), and that they carried a median mounted load of 81.5kg (IQR 63-99kg). We found that 87.4% of donkeys carried a load above 50% of their bodyweight ratio (BWR), the median BWR carried was 77.1% (IQR 54.5-90.7%), and 25.3% of donkeys carried above 90% BWR. Donkeys that were loaded at more than 50% BWR were more likely to sit, compared to donkeys loaded with less weight (p=0.01). Donkeys working in peri-urban and urban areas were more likely to carry a greater BWR than donkeys working in rural areas (P<0.001), as were those carrying construction materials or bricks, compared to agricultural materials (p=0.004). Age (p=0.03) and breed (p=0.01) were also associated with carrying a higher weight. Overloading based on current recommendations (50% BWR) was common, with the majority (87.4%) of donkeys reported to carry more than the recommended 50% limit. This survey provides evidence of on-the-ground working practices and factors associated with mounted load carrying, which is critical for developing evidence-based recommendations for loading, in order to improve the welfare of working donkeys.

scientific communication and education↗