Investing in People

Foundations have long created programs to provide grants to individuals—most often in the form of fellowships, scholarships, and prizes. Several of these programs have become so prominent that they are now institutions in and of themselves. Consider just a few examples: the Pulitzer Prize, Fulbright Program, and MacArthur "genius" awards. Governments, as well as foundations large and small, fund individual support programs.The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has generously allowed the authors of this report to examine its portfolio of individual support programs to explore what the authors believe are some of the strategic fundamentals underlying this type of programming that could be applied to future individual support grantmaking. The purpose of this study is to inform those interested in individual support programs about not only some of the strategy considerations underlying this type of grantmaking but what these programs can be expected to achieve—and under what circumstances.

The journals of importance to UK clinicians: A questionnaire survey of surgeons

Background: Peer-reviewed journals are seen as a major vehicle in the transmission of research findings to clinicians. Perspectives on the importance of individual journals vary and the use of impact factors to assess research is criticised. Other surveys of clinicians suggest a few key journals within a specialty, and sub-specialties, are widely read. Journals with high impact factors are not always widely read or perceived as important. In order to determine whether UK surgeons consider peer-reviewed journals to be important information sources and which journals they read and consider important to inform their clinical practice, we conducted a postal questionnaire survey and then compared the findings with those from a survey of US surgeons. Methods: A questionnaire survey sent to 2,660 UK surgeons asked which information sources they considered to be important and which peer-reviewed journals they read, and perceived as important, to inform their clinical practice. Comparisons were made with numbers of UK NHSfunded surgery publications, journal impact factors and other similar surveys. Results: Peer-reviewed journals were considered to be the second most important information source for UK surgeons. A mode of four journals read was found with academics reading more than non-academics. Two journals, the BMJ and the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, are prominent across all sub-specialties and others within sub-specialties. The British Journal of Surgery plays a key role within three sub-specialties. UK journals are generally preferred and readership patterns are influenced by membership journals. Some of the journals viewed by surgeons as being most important, for example the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, do not have high impact factors. Conclusion: Combining the findings from this study with comparable studies highlights the importance of national journals and of membership journals. Our study also illustrates the complexity of the link between the impact factors of journals and the importance of the journals to clinicians. This analysis potentially provides an additional basis on which to assess the role of different journals, and the published output from research

National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank: A standard based biospecimen and clinical data resource to enhance translational research

Background: Advances in translational research have led to the need for well characterized biospecimens for research. The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank is an initiative which collects annotated datasets relevant to human mesothelioma to develop an enterprising biospecimen resource to fulfill researchers' need. Methods: The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank architecture is based on three major components: (a) common data elements (based on College of American Pathologists protocol and National North American Association of Central Cancer Registries standards), (b) clinical and epidemiologic data annotation, and (c) data query tools. These tools work interoperably to standardize the entire process of annotation. The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank tool is based upon the caTISSUE Clinical Annotation Engine, developed by the University of Pittsburgh in cooperation with the Cancer Biomedical Informatics Grid™ (caBIG™, see http://cabig.nci.nih.gov). This application provides a web-based system for annotating, importing and searching mesothelioma cases. The underlying information model is constructed utilizing Unified Modeling Language class diagrams, hierarchical relationships and Enterprise Architect software. Result: The database provides researchers real-time access to richly annotated specimens and integral information related to mesothelioma. The data disclosed is tightly regulated depending upon users' authorization and depending on the participating institute that is amenable to the local Institutional Review Board and regulation committee reviews. Conclusion: The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank currently has over 600 annotated cases available for researchers that include paraffin embedded tissues, tissue microarrays, serum and genomic DNA. The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank is a virtual biospecimen registry with robust translational biomedical informatics support to facilitate basic science, clinical, and translational research. Furthermore, it protects patient privacy by disclosing only de-identified datasets to assure that biospecimens can be made accessible to researchers. © 2008 Amin et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

New Jersey's Nursing Faculty Shortage

Examines the state of the nursing faculty workforce in New Jersey, factors behind the shortage, issues that affect recruitment and retention, and promising practices. Recommends strategies to fill the gap, including re-examining the nursing curriculum