E. Ray Dorsey

The Influence of Controllable Lifestyle and Sex on the Specialty Choices of Graduating U.s. Medical Students, 1996–2003

Purpose To determine whether the preferences of female medical students are sufficient to explain the recent trend of U.S. medical students choosing specialties with controllable lifestyles. Method Specialty choice for graduating U.S. medical students by sex was determined from the responses to the Association of American Medical Colleges’ 1996–2003 Medical School Graduation Questionnaires. Using earlier research, specialties were classified as having an uncontrollable or controllable lifestyle. Log-linear models were constructed to assess the strength of association among trends in specialty choice, controllable lifestyle, and sex. Results The percentage of women choosing specialties with controllable lifestyles increased from 18% in 1996 to 36% in 2003. For men, the percentage grew from 28% to 45%. The change in preference for controllable lifestyle specialties accounted for a large proportion of the variability in specialty choices for both women and men from 1996–2003 (&khgr;2 for changes common to women and men = 920, 1 df, p < .0001). The difference between women and men in the trend toward controllable lifestyle specialties was small relative to the common changes (&khgr;2for differences = 12, 1 df, p = .0005). Conclusion Controllable lifestyle was strongly associated with the recent trends in specialty choice for both women and men and could not be explained solely by the specialty preferences of women.

Funding of US Biomedical Research, 2003-2008

CONTEXT With the exception of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, funding support for biomedical research in the United States has slowed after a decade of doubling. However, the extent and scope of slowing are largely unknown. OBJECTIVE To quantify funding of biomedical research in the United States from 2003 to 2008. DESIGN Publicly available data were used to quantify funding from government (federal, state, and local), private, and industry sources. Regression models were used to compare financial trends between 1994-2003 and 2003-2007. The numbers of new drug and device approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration over the same period were also evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Funding and growth rates by source; numbers of US Food and Drug Administration approvals. RESULTS Biomedical research funding increased from

The Anatomy of Medical Research: US and International Comparisons

75.5 billion in 2003 to

Identification of Genetic Factors that Modify Clinical Onset of Huntington’s Disease

101.1 billion in 2007. In 2008, funding from the National Institutes of Health and industry totaled

NIH Disease Funding Levels and Burden of Disease

88.8 billion. In 2007, funding from these sources, adjusted for inflation, was

Impact of FDA Black Box Advisory on Antipsychotic Medication Use

90.2 billion. Adjusted for inflation, funding from 2003 to 2007 increased by 14%, for a compound annual growth rate of 3.4%. By comparison, funding from 1994 to 2003 increased at an annual rate of 7.8% (P < .001). In 2007, industry (58%) was the largest funder, followed by the federal government (33%). Modest increase in funding was not accompanied by an increase in approvals for drugs or devices. In 2007, the United States spent an estimated 4.5% of its total health expenditures on biomedical research and 0.1% on health services research. CONCLUSION After a decade of doubling, the rate of increase in biomedical research funding slowed from 2003 to 2007, and after adjustment for inflation, the absolute level of funding from the National Institutes of Health and industry appears to have decreased by 2% in 2008.

Impact of FDA drug risk communications on health care utilization and health behaviors: A systematic review

IMPORTANCE Medical research is a prerequisite of clinical advances, while health service research supports improved delivery, access, and cost. Few previous analyses have compared the United States with other developed countries. OBJECTIVES To quantify total public and private investment and personnel (economic inputs) and to evaluate resulting patents, publications, drug and device approvals, and value created (economic outputs). EVIDENCE REVIEW Publicly available data from 1994 to 2012 were compiled showing trends in US and international research funding, productivity, and disease burden by source and industry type. Patents and publications (1981-2011) were evaluated using citation rates and impact factors. FINDINGS (1) Reduced science investment: Total US funding increased 6% per year (1994-2004), but rate of growth declined to 0.8% per year (2004-2012), reaching

State of Telehealth

117 billion (4.5%) of total health care expenditures. Private sources increased from 46% (1994) to 58% (2012). Industry reduced early-stage research, favoring medical devices, bioengineered drugs, and late-stage clinical trials, particularly for cancer and rare diseases. National Insitutes of Health allocations correlate imperfectly with disease burden, with cancer and HIV/AIDS receiving disproportionate support. (2) Underfunding of service innovation: Health services research receives

Technology in Parkinson's disease: Challenges and opportunities

5.0 billion (0.3% of total health care expenditures) or only 1/20th of science funding. Private insurers ranked last (0.04% of revenue) and health systems 19th (0.1% of revenue) among 22 industries in their investment in innovation. An increment of

Increasing access to specialty care: A pilot, randomized controlled trial of telemedicine for Parkinson's disease†

8 billion to