How does NIH determine which schools are designated MSTP?

[206278]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'd like to know more information about how the NIH determines which institutions get federal funding in support of an MSTP.

Currently, I believe there are about 42 NIH-funded MSTPs. Is this number supposed to increase or stay flat in coming years? Would an NIH budget increase mean more MSTPs, or more money to existing MSTPs, or would it have no effect? What about cuts in federal funding?

I noticed that the UConn no longer appears on the list of MSTPs (http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/InstPredoc/PredocInst-MSTP.htm) and that Indiana University is now listed, both changes from last year if I'm not mistaken. What prompts the NIH to add or drop MSTP funding to a particular school? Also, Ohio State is the only medical school ranked in the top 30 by US News and World Report (see http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=508799&highlight=rankings) which does not have an MSTP. Why is this?

 

[JLC]

I believe NIH funds schools with stronger research facilities and faculties, and hence why most of the top research schools have MSTP

And seeing how NIH hasn't received too much of an increase in funding, I wouldn't be too sure that there will be an increase in MSTP spots

 

[britishmafia]

I'd like to know more information about how the NIH determines which institutions get federal funding in support of an MSTP.

Currently, I believe there are about 42 NIH-funded MSTPs. Is this number supposed to increase or stay flat in coming years? Would an NIH budget increase mean more MSTPs, or more money to existing MSTPs, or would it have no effect? What about cuts in federal funding?

I noticed that the UConn no longer appears on the list of MSTPs (http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/InstPredoc/PredocInst-MSTP.htm) and that Indiana University is now listed, both changes from last year if I'm not mistaken. What prompts the NIH to add or drop MSTP funding to a particular school? Also, Ohio State is the only medical school ranked in the top 30 by US News and World Report (see http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=508799&highlight=rankings) which does not have an MSTP. Why is this?

Is Ohio State ranked Top 30 for research or primary care? A lot of the Top 20 schools in primary care do not have MSTP programs, but they are excellent medical schools. Keep that in mind too. It's all about the research facilities, as JLC said.

 

[Neuronix]

There's probably nobody on this forum that really has the insider info to answer your questions. The closest thread I can think of is:

http://drslounge.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=263411

Is Ohio State ranked Top 30 for research or primary care?

He's talking about Research rankings. On SDN people are always talking about research rankings unless otherwise specified. A click on his provided link would also have told you.

 

[Enkidu]

Hi,
I'm in the OSU MD/PhD program, so I might have a little bit of insight about the MSTP funding issue. I think that the short answer to the question is that the MD/PhD program at OSU is not really very old. The NIH likes to have certain statistics about a program before it grants MSTP funding, and since the program takes ~8 years to complete it does take a while to build up those statistics. To be honest, though, we did apply for the grant this year and we're pretty optimistic about it. Hope that helps.

 

[strangeglove]

This may be obvious, but deserves mentioning: NIH funds MSTP programs based upon a grant review process, with a 5-year renewal cycle. They get priority scores, just like other grants. The director of the MSTP is the "PI" of this grant, which is funded by the NIGMS. Programs lose MSTP status when they fail to attain renewal of this grant.

Research reputation is an important factor, but not the most important. More important is training environment, primarily how students gain access to research opportunities, curricula, recruitment, retention, and stuff like that.

 

[URHere]

Other factors considered during grant review are level of support available to students (via meetings with advisors and exposure to practicing physician scientists), publication/presentation record of current students, successful recruitment, and organization of the MD/PhD program itself. It's almost like MD/PhD programs are applying for a scholarship - they need to convince the NIH committees that they are exceptionally well qualified to train physician scientists, or at least better qualified than the other schools applying for NIH funding.

 

[Neuronix]

So who wants to try to get the actual results of these grants under the Freedom of Information Act 😀 I double-dog dare you.

 

[Doodledog]

So who wants to try to get the actual results of these grants under the Freedom of Information Act 😀 I double-dog dare you.

Complex legal issue involved here. See the FOIA information towards the bottom here. Not so easy to get this info and frankly I don't think it should be released under FOIA for unfunded grants of any sort.

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part5.htm

 

[Neuronix]

frankly I don't think it should be released under FOIA for unfunded grants of any sort.

I agree. I meant for the MSTP grants that ARE funded. It is likely possible given the link you posted.

NIH generally will release the following types of records pursuant to a FOIA request:

l Funded applications and funded progress reports, including award data

l Final reports that have been transmitted to the grantee organization of any audit, survey, review, or evaluation of grantee performance.

The programs constantly make all sorts of claims to applicants that are unsubstantiated and the only thing we get to know about this process is from the dog and pony show we call admissions. I'd love to be able to produce an objective, independent evaluation of all the MSTPs. But, it's already there in the form of NIH grant applications and evaluations! It would just take an enterprising individual to try it...

 

[bd4727]

The programs constantly make all sorts of claims to applicants that are unsubstantiated

This is so true

 

[Neuronix]

This is so true

 

[The Ponderosa]

Heads up, The Ohio State University now does have an MSTP.

http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/new...cine_Advances_Medical_Scientist_Program.shtml

I believe it is the only new school in the last 5 years or so to be awarded the MSTP (pretty impressive considering the financial cutbacks made during the past few years)

 

[Doctor&Geek]

Heads up, The Ohio State University now does have an MSTP.

http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/new...cine_Advances_Medical_Scientist_Program.shtml

I believe it is the only new school in the last 5 years or so to be awarded the MSTP (pretty impressive considering the financial cutbacks made during the past few years)

Nope. Indiana and Maryland off the top of my head got funding.

 

[Maebea]

Add U. Illinois @ Chicago, U. Cincinnati, Medical College of Wisconsin, Medical U of South Carolina to the list of programs getting MSTP grants over the past 5 or so years.

Despite the flatline for training funding, the NIGMS has been able to add programs to the roster because some established programs have slipped in recent years and lost a portion of their grant slots. These slots were distributed to excellent programs like THE OSU, Maryland, etc.

 

[The Ponderosa]

Add U. Illinois @ Chicago, U. Cincinnati, Medical College of Wisconsin, Medical U of South Carolina to the list of programs getting MSTP grants over the past 5 or so years.

Despite the flatline for training funding, the NIGMS has been able to add programs to the roster because some established programs have slipped in recent years and lost a portion of their grant slots. These slots were distributed to excellent programs like THE OSU, Maryland, etc.

Well there you go. I guess I should have fact-checked the information I heard some speculate on before passing it along. By the way, which programs have lost a portion of their grant slots?