| Title |
Outcome Evaluation of the National Cancer Institute Career Development Awards Program
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-012-0444-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julie L. Mason, Ming Lei, Jessica M. Faupel-Badger, Erika P. Ginsburg, Yvette R. Seger, Leo DiJoseph, Joshua D. Schnell, Jonathan S. Wiest |
| Abstract |
The National Cancer Institute (NCI) career development (K) awards program supports investigators to develop their cancer research programs and achieve independence. The NCI Center for Cancer Training conducted a K program evaluation by analyzing outcomes of awardees and individuals who applied to the program but were not funded. The evaluation covered seven NCI mechanisms (K01, K07, K08, K11, K22, K23, and K25) between 1980 and 2008. Descriptive statistics and regression modeling were performed on the full cohort (n = 2,893 individuals, 4,081 K applications) and a comparison cohort described herein. K awardees proportionately received more subsequent NIH grants and authored more publications, and time to first R01 grant was unaffected. Of those not pursuing research, K awardees were more likely to participate in activities signaling continued scientific engagement. The NCI K program had a positive impact, not only on participants' biomedical research careers but also on achieving outcomes significant to the scientific enterprise. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 16% |
| Librarian | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Psychology | 2 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,320,302
of 24,673,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#20
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,602
of 291,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,673,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 291,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.