Women scientists who applied for a new high-risk research award from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) had a lower funding success rate than their male counterparts.
The NIH last month announced the winners of more than 100 new awards totalling US$348 million over five years for outside-the-box biomedical research. The grants came in three flavours: Pioneer awards for innovative researchers at any career stage, New Innovator Awards for up-and-coming investigators, and a new category rolled out for the first time: Transformative R01 (T-R01) Awards for bold and uncertain projects.
As Nature reported last month, more than a third of Pioneer and New Innovator awards went to women, but female researchers made up only around 15% of T-R01 awardees. The question at the time was: How did this compare to the gender ratios of the applicants?
Nature has now learned the answer. According to data newly obtained from the NIH under a freedom of information request, 32% of Pioneer Award applicants and 40% of New Innovator Award applicants who listed their gender were women — on par with the gender ratios of the awardees, which were 34.5% and 39% female, respectively, for the two individual-based awards.
Women applicants fared worse, however, for the T-R01 competition, where 21% of grant hopefuls who listed their gender said they were women, yet only 9 of 59, or 15%, of the awardees were women. This difference, though not statistically significant according to Nature‘s chi-square test statistical analysis (Χ2 = 0.99, p = 0.32), does not help realize the NIH’s vision of developing “opportunities and programs to support recruitment, retention, re-entry, and advancement of girls and women in biomedical careers”.
The NIH is now requesting applications for the 2010 T-R01s.
Image: NIH
Recent comments on this blog
Experiments reveal that crabs and lobsters feel pain
US research ethics agency upholds decision on informed consent
Chemistry credit disputes under the spotlight
Chemistry credit disputes under the spotlight
Contamination created controversial ‘acid-induced’ stem cells