A key indicator of medical research excellence has shown the School of Medicine's 2002 growth rate to be tops among its peers.
National Institutes of Health funding to the medical school rose by more than 20 percent-a growth rate unsurpassed by any of the other top 15 institutions in the nation. Duke maintained is eighth-place ranking for the second straight year.
"Because obtaining an NIH grant is a very competitive, peer-reviewed process, the NIH rankings are a surrogate marker for excellence in science," said Dr. Ross McKinney, vice dean of the School of Medicine. "The School of Medicine is doing research of high caliber in a broad range of research areas [and] we've done well because we have excellent investigators working hard on important projects."
Up from about 500 NIH awards in the 2001 fiscal year, the medical school raked in nearly 600 in the 2002 fiscal year, receiving a total of $245.5 million for research, training, fellowship and development contracts and awards.
Dr. Edward Halperin, vice dean of the School of Medicine, stressed the importance of maintaining a consistent presence in the top tier of the NIH rankings of awards to U.S. medical schools.
"If institutions, like people, are partially judged by the company they keep, then being in the company of Johns Hopkins, Harvard, Washington at St. Louis and the University of Pennsylvania is very flattering," Halperin said.
While the NIH rankings measure the quantity of research being done, the quality of research is a better measure of continued future success, Halperin said. McKinney agreed, noting that a larger institution has an advantage in moving up in the NIH rankings.
"Doing better science is more efficient [in moving up the rankings]," McKinney said. "But the rankings don't reflect issues like the number of grant dollars per faculty member, or the amount of funding per square foot of laboratory space-and those might be better markers of actual research excellence and productivity."
The Medical Center is particularly known for its strength in the basic sciences of cell proliferation and cell cycle control, heart disease, neurosciences, genetics, solid tumor physiology, mental illness and musculoskeletal disease.
Such strengths - in addition to the continued recruitment of outstanding new faculty, the construction of new facilities and commitment to clinical research through the Duke Clinical Research Institute - ensure the medical school's ability to produce quality research, McKinney said.
"The continued growth and enterprise of our faculty forebode well for continued growth in our grant receipts next year and continued high quality as evidenced by publication in top-tier scientific journals and citations," Halperin said.
Over the past few years, a surge in the NIH's awards budget has helped research institutions receive more funding. Future prospects in the NIH funding growth rate, however, are "about to hit a ceiling," McKinney said. The 2002 fiscal year marks the completion of the NIH budget increases and the beginning of a funding stagnation.
"The prospects are for a much more challenging time," said McKinney. "We feel we've got the right people to continue to increase our portion of the NIH funding pool, but the pool isn't going to be growing as it has."
Junior faculty and more creative research ideas with smaller chances of success may be most hurt by reduced funding opportunities. Cutting-edge initiatives such as the Institute for Genome Science and Policies, however, should help the medical school maintain its position among other institutions, as funding is often better in "hot" fields of research.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.