Methodologies For Studying NIH Funded Laboratory Output: A Mixed Methods Approach

My research is focused on methodologies for increasing funding for National Institute of Health (NIH) funded laboratories. More specifically I am interested in exploring how mixed methods of research, such as guided survey methods, semi-structured interviews, and bibliometrics can provide a greater number of comprehensive metrics for attaining/continuing funding. For NIH funded laboratories, producing metrics that show NIH objectives were met is necessary for demonstrating the value of the laboratory’s efforts and value of their research. The primary way that laboratories can ensure funding will continue to support their efforts is by showing how funds are being used in the laboratory, and the value that award funding provides to the scientific community, as well as public health. To meet NIH objectives around the development of large-scale laboratories Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE), Centers for Translational Science Awards (CTSA), other translational science efforts and initiatives, investing in efforts that record greater metrics and additional records of valuable output from laboratories is imperative for growth. The thread of these three chapters provides sufficient evidence that positive ontological direction for NIH funded laboratories can happen with integrating more inclusive evaluation frameworks. Former frameworks for evaluating laboratories involved collecting totals of output that exclusively captured scientific dissemination via publication metrics, this includes citation rates, publication counts, patents, completed therapy trials (to name a few). For a better direction, I am proposing that new benefits models are tested in addition to these common methods of collecting metrics, such as the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM). The TSBM includes over 16 indicators that can track scientific benefits in addition to the traditional counts (citations, publications, patents, therapy, and drug trials). The TSBM includes educational initiatives, public health resources, legislative progress, and other indicators that the funding the laboratory receives is being used to do beneficial work for science and the communities that are touched by the funded laboratory. By widening the metrics by evaluating a lab to include other evidence of value in science, laboratories can better illustrate the innovation coming from their laboratories.