IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0029738.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Aging of Biomedical Research in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Kirstin R W Matthews
  • Kara M Calhoun
  • Nathan Lo
  • Vivian Ho

Abstract

In the past 30 years, the average age of biomedical researchers has steadily increased. The average age of an investigator at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) rose from 39 to 51 between 1980 and 2008. The aging of the biomedical workforce was even more apparent when looking at first-time NIH grantees. The average age of a new investigator was 42 in 2008, compared to 36 in 1980. To determine if the rising barriers at NIH for entry in biomedical research might impact innovative ideas and research, we analyzed the research and publications of Nobel Prize winners from 1980 to 2010 to assess the age at which their pioneering research occurred. We established that in the 30-year period, 96 scientists won the Nobel Prize in medicine or chemistry for work related to biomedicine, and that their groundbreaking research was conducted at an average age of 41—one year younger than the average age of a new investigator at NIH. Furthermore, 78% of the Nobel Prize winners conducted their research before the age of 51, the average age of an NIH principal investigator. This suggested that limited access to NIH might inhibit research potential and novel projects, and could impact biomedicine and the next generation scientists in the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirstin R W Matthews & Kara M Calhoun & Nathan Lo & Vivian Ho, 2011. "The Aging of Biomedical Research in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-6, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0029738
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029738
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0029738
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0029738&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0029738?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Cyranoski & Natasha Gilbert & Heidi Ledford & Anjali Nayar & Mohammed Yahia, 2011. "Education: The PhD factory," Nature, Nature, vol. 472(7343), pages 276-279, April.
    2. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2010. "A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1564-1581, August.
    3. K. Brad Wray, 2004. "An examination of the contributions of young scientists in new fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(1), pages 117-128, September.
    4. Francis Collins, 2010. "Scientists need a shorter path to research freedom," Nature, Nature, vol. 467(7316), pages 635-635, October.
    5. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2010. "A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impact," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1564-1581, August.
    6. Mark Taylor, 2011. "Reform the PhD system or close it down," Nature, Nature, vol. 472(7343), pages 261-261, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alex J. Yang & Huimin Xu & Ying Ding & Meijun Liu, 2024. "Unveiling the dynamics of team age structure and its impact on scientific innovation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6127-6148, October.
    2. Benjamin Jones & E.J. Reedy & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2014. "Age and Scientific Genius," NBER Working Papers 19866, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Andrea M Zimmerman, 2018. "Navigating the path to a biomedical science career," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, September.
    4. Zane, Ariel C. & Onken, James & Parker, Marie B. & Ghosh, Dolan, 2023. "An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2015. "The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: Where Canada stands in comparison to the United States," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 753-787, January.
    2. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3543-3575, June.
    3. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2011. "Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 145-161, July.
    4. Claus-Christian Carbon, 2011. "The Carbon_h-Factor: Predicting Individuals' Research Impact at Early Stages of Their Career," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-7, December.
    5. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    6. Wildgaard, Lorna, 2016. "A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1055-1078.
    7. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2012. "The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 155-168.
    8. Ioana Alexandra Horodnic & Adriana Zaiţ, 2015. "Motivation and research productivity in a university system undergoing transition," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 282-292.
    9. Xingchen Li & Qiang Wu & Yuanyuan Liu, 2017. "A quantitative analysis of researcher citation personal display considering disciplinary differences and influence factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1093-1112, November.
    10. João M. Santos & Hugo Horta, 2015. "The generational gap of science: a dynamic cluster analysis of doctorates in an evolving scientific system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 381-406, July.
    11. , Aisdl, 2021. "Top economics universities and research institutions in Vietnam: evidence from the SSHPA dataset," OSF Preprints xvnkj, Center for Open Science.
    12. Lucy Amez, 2012. "Citation measures at the micro level: Influence of publication age, field, and uncitedness," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1459-1465, July.
    13. Walter Pérez Villa & Amaya Pérez-Ezcurdia & Miguel Angel Vigil Berrocal, 2022. "Tacit Contributions and Roles of Senior Researchers: Experiences of a Multinational Company," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, December.
    14. Tóth, Tamás & Demeter, Márton & Csuhai, Sándor & Major, Zsolt Balázs, 2024. "When career-boosting is on the line: Equity and inequality in grant evaluation, productivity, and the educational backgrounds of Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions individual fellows in social sciences an," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    15. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Costas, Rodrigo, 2014. "The skewness of scientific productivity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 917-934.
    16. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, CiriacoAndrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2024. "The moderating role of personal characteristics of authors in the publications’ quality for quantity trade-off," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    17. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2011. "Research productivity: Are higher academic ranks more productive than lower ones?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 915-928, September.
    18. Frank Havemann & Birger Larsen, 2015. "Bibliometric indicators of young authors in astrophysics: Can later stars be predicted?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1413-1434, February.
    19. Alona Zharova & Wolfgang K. Härdle & Stefan Lessmann, 2017. "Is Scientific Performance a Function of Funds?," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2017-028, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    20. Andersen, Jens Peter & Nielsen, Mathias Wullum, 2018. "Google Scholar and Web of Science: Examining gender differences in citation coverage across five scientific disciplines," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 950-959.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0029738. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.