Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: Sponsored by the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP), the New Investigator Award (NIA) provides start-up funding for the independent research programs of early-career faculty. However, there is limited information on outcomes. Thus, the objective was to determine the impact of the NIA program on the stimulation of recipient research programs and AACP involvement.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 2012-2022 NIA Award recipients and current pharmacy Department Chairs was conducted. The instruments (NIA Recipient:28-items, Chair:15-items) were administered via Qualtrics with data reported descriptively.
Results: Responses were received from 96 NIA recipients and 157 Chairs (60%, 49% response rate). From the NIA recipients, most respondents received the award within their first 2 years of appointment (59%), received it on the first submission (61%), remained in academia (96%) at the same institution (90%), and were AACP members (80%) with a variety of involvement. Projects were typically completed (81%) and utilized for another grant (51%). Two-thirds of faculty had received external funding post-NIA (64%), and most felt the grant was valuable or very valuable. From the Department Chair survey, 40% had NIA recipients and 13% had served as a mentor. Departments did not have an NIA development/review process (77%) but had a mentoring program (59%). Most perceived the NIA program to be valuable/very valuable.
Conclusion: Overall, chairs and NIA recipients have positive perceptions of the value of the NIA and recipients reported evidence of scholarly success.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.100665 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!