Search our Database of Scientific Publications and Authors

I’m looking for a
    The anatomy of medical school patenting.
    N Engl J Med 2007 Nov;357(20):2049-56
    Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.
    Background: Although issues related to patenting by faculty at academic medical centers have been the source of much controversy, there is little systematic evidence of the growth of these activities, their distribution among academic departments, and their relationship to faculty research efforts.

    Methods: We pooled data on medical school faculty, National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant activity, and patenting to examine changes in the propensity to apply for a patent during the period from 1981 through 2000 that was subsequently granted, the distribution of these activities among departments, and the relationships between patenting and variables associated with individual faculty members. These variables included sex, academic degree, years since the last academic degree was earned, patenting by departmental peers, and NIH funding history. In addition to basic descriptive statistics, we estimated Poisson regression models based on the number of patents a faculty member applied for as a function of these variables.

    Results: Applications for patents that were subsequently granted per medical school faculty increased dramatically during the period from 1981 through 2000. Although most patenting activity was carried out by faculty members in clinical departments, their rate of patents was low relative to that of faculty members in basic science departments. Regression results showed that persons were more likely to patent if they had recent NIH funding, were male, had Ph.D. degrees, were more experienced faculty members, and worked in departments with higher patenting rates.

    Conclusions: Although the number of patents granted to medical school faculty increased dramatically during this period, patent activity was concentrated among a small number of departments and faculty members. Moreover, persons who had recently received NIH funding were more likely to apply for a patent than those who had not received such funding.

    Similar Publications

    Pediatric Research. National Institutes of Health support in the 'steady-state' decade, 1983-1993.
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996 Sep;150(9):971-4
    Department of Pediatrics, University of California Los Angeles, School of Medicine, USA.
    Objective: To examine the trend in the US Public Health Service's National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for pediatric research over the last 10 years in terms of dollars expended, grants awarded to pediatrics departments vs other medical school departments, NIH Clinical Research Center support, and the distribution of NIH grants to all medical schools and children's hospitals in the United States.

    Methods: Statistical information from the Division of Research Resources of the NIH, the NIH Clinical Research Center office, and the Society for Pediatric Research for the fiscal year 1982-1983 was compared with fiscal year 1992-1993. Inflation-adjusted dollar calculations were used. Read More
    Comparing National Institutes of Health funding of emergency medicine to four medical specialties.
    Acad Emerg Med 2011 Sep 19;18(9):1001-4. Epub 2011 Aug 19.
    Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
    Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding received in 2008 by emergency medicine (EM) to the specialties of internal medicine, pediatrics, anesthesiology, and family medicine. The hypothesis was that EM would receive fewer NIH awards and less funding dollars per active physician and per medical school faculty member compared to the other four specialties.

    Methods: Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) were used to identify NIH-funded grants to 125 of the 133 U. Read More
    Downsizing of basic science departments in U. S. medical schools: perceptions of their chairs. The National Caucus of Basic Biomedical Science Chairs.
    Acad Med 1997 Oct;72(10):894-900
    Department of Pharmacology, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, D.C. 20037, USA.
    Purpose: To assess the status of basic science departments in academic health centers through a survey of department chairs.

    Method: In November 1995 the National Caucus of Basic Biomedical Science Chairs developed a 35-item questionnaire that was sent to the presidents of the Caucus's six member associations, who distributed it to their medical school chairs. The questionnaire was sent to 90% of the basic science chairs; a total of 683 questionnaires were distributed. Read More
    Distribution of research awards from the National Institutes of Health among medical schools.
    N Engl J Med 2000 Jan;342(4):250-5
    Center for the Assessment and Management of Change in Academic Medicine, Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC 20037, USA.
    Background: Previous studies have demonstrated that a small number of the 125 medical schools in the United States receive a disproportionately large share of the research awards granted by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). We assessed whether the distribution of NIH research awards to medical schools changed between 1986 and 1997.

    Methods: We used NIH data to rank medical schools in each year from 1986 to 1997 according to the number of awards each school received (as a measure of each school's activity in research, also referred to as research intensity). Read More