Association Between Institution ZIP Code Characteristics and NIH Funding.

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Promotion Practice Pub Date : 2024-05-11 DOI:10.1177/15248399241246550
Ryan Huebinger, Ryan A Coute, Mandy J Hill, Audrey L Blewer, Marina Del Rios
{"title":"Association Between Institution ZIP Code Characteristics and NIH Funding.","authors":"Ryan Huebinger, Ryan A Coute, Mandy J Hill, Audrey L Blewer, Marina Del Rios","doi":"10.1177/15248399241246550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Introduction</i>. While racial NIH funding disparities have been identified, little is known about the link between community demographics of institutions and NIH funding. We sought to evaluate the association between institution zip code characteristics and NIH funding. <i>Methods</i>. We linked the 2011-2021 NIH RePORTER database to Census data. We calculated the funding to each institution and stratified institutions into funding quartiles. We defined out independent variables as institution ZIP code level race/ethnicity (White, Black, and Hispanic), and socioeconomic status (household income, high school graduation rate, and unemployment rate). We used ordinal regression models to evaluate the association between institution ZIP code characteristics and grant funding quartile. <i>Results</i>. We included 731,548 grants (US$271,495,839,744) from 3,971 ZIP codes. The funding amounts in millions of U.S. dollars for the funding quartiles were fourth - 0.25, third - 1.1, second - 3.8, first - 43.5. Using ordinal regression, we found an association between increasing unemployment rate (OR = 1.03 [1.02, 1.05]), increasing high school graduation rate (OR = 3.6 [1.6, 8.4]), decreasing proportion of White people (OR = 0.4 [0.3, 0.5]), increasing proportion of Black people (OR = 1.3 [0.9, 1.8]), and increasing proportion of Hispanic/Latine people (OR = 2.5 [1.7, 3.5]) and higher grant funding quartiles. We found no association between household income and grant funding quartile. <i>Conclusion</i>. We found ZIP code demographics to be inadequate for evaluating NIH funding disparities, and the association between institution ZIP code demographics and investigator demographics is unclear. To evaluate and improve grant funding disparities, better grant recipient data accessibility and transparency are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47956,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399241246550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. While racial NIH funding disparities have been identified, little is known about the link between community demographics of institutions and NIH funding. We sought to evaluate the association between institution zip code characteristics and NIH funding. Methods. We linked the 2011-2021 NIH RePORTER database to Census data. We calculated the funding to each institution and stratified institutions into funding quartiles. We defined out independent variables as institution ZIP code level race/ethnicity (White, Black, and Hispanic), and socioeconomic status (household income, high school graduation rate, and unemployment rate). We used ordinal regression models to evaluate the association between institution ZIP code characteristics and grant funding quartile. Results. We included 731,548 grants (US$271,495,839,744) from 3,971 ZIP codes. The funding amounts in millions of U.S. dollars for the funding quartiles were fourth - 0.25, third - 1.1, second - 3.8, first - 43.5. Using ordinal regression, we found an association between increasing unemployment rate (OR = 1.03 [1.02, 1.05]), increasing high school graduation rate (OR = 3.6 [1.6, 8.4]), decreasing proportion of White people (OR = 0.4 [0.3, 0.5]), increasing proportion of Black people (OR = 1.3 [0.9, 1.8]), and increasing proportion of Hispanic/Latine people (OR = 2.5 [1.7, 3.5]) and higher grant funding quartiles. We found no association between household income and grant funding quartile. Conclusion. We found ZIP code demographics to be inadequate for evaluating NIH funding disparities, and the association between institution ZIP code demographics and investigator demographics is unclear. To evaluate and improve grant funding disparities, better grant recipient data accessibility and transparency are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机构邮政编码特征与美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)资助之间的关联。
导言。尽管美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)的种族资助差异已经被发现,但人们对研究机构的社区人口统计与 NIH 资助之间的联系却知之甚少。我们试图评估机构邮政编码特征与美国国立卫生研究院经费之间的关联。方法。我们将 2011-2021 年美国国立卫生研究院 RePORTER 数据库与人口普查数据相链接。我们计算了每个机构获得的资助,并将机构划分为资助四分位数。我们将自变量定义为机构邮政编码级别的种族/族裔(白人、黑人和西班牙裔)和社会经济状况(家庭收入、高中毕业率和失业率)。我们使用序数回归模型来评估机构邮政编码特征与资助资金四分位数之间的关联。结果。我们纳入了来自 3,971 个邮政编码的 731,548 笔资助(271,495,839,744 美元)。以百万美元为单位的资助金额四分位数分别为:第四位 - 0.25 美元,第三位 - 1.1 美元,第二位 - 3.8 美元,第一位 - 43.5 美元。通过序数回归,我们发现失业率上升(OR = 1.03 [1.02, 1.05])、高中毕业率上升(OR = 3.6 [1.6, 8.4])、白人比例下降(OR = 0.4 [0.3, 0.5])、黑人比例增加(OR = 1.3 [0.9, 1.8])、西班牙裔/拉丁裔比例增加(OR = 2.5 [1.7, 3.5])以及补助资金四分位数越高。我们没有发现家庭收入与赠款资助四分位数之间存在关联。结论。我们发现,邮政编码人口统计学不足以评估美国国立卫生研究院的资助差异,而且机构邮政编码人口统计学与研究人员人口统计学之间的关联也不明确。为了评估和改善拨款差距,需要提高拨款接受者数据的可获取性和透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion Practice
Health Promotion Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Health Promotion Practice (HPP) publishes authoritative articles devoted to the practical application of health promotion and education. It publishes information of strategic importance to a broad base of professionals engaged in the practice of developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. The journal"s editorial board is committed to focusing on the applications of health promotion and public health education interventions, programs and best practice strategies in various settings, including but not limited to, community, health care, worksite, educational, and international settings. Additionally, the journal focuses on the development and application of public policy conducive to the promotion of health and prevention of disease.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Public Health Agency and Utility Training Needs for CDC National Wastewater Surveillance System Jurisdictions in the United States. Formative Research to Design and Evaluate Caring Text Messages for American Indian and Alaska Native Youth, College Students, and Veterans. Group-Based Medical Mistrust in Adolescents With Poorly Controlled Asthma Living in Rural Areas. "Did You Wash Your Hands?" The Socioeconomic Inequalities Preventing Youth From Adopting Protective Behaviors During COVID-19 in South Africa. Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Conduct a Collaborative Needs Assessment of Mental Health Service Users: Identifying Research Questions and Building Academic-Community Trust.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1