Analysis of MRC-supported early career researcher success in obtaining follow-on research funding
Viney, I. S.; Dolby, K.; Samarisinghe, B.
Show abstract
This study examined the progress of MRC-funded researchers, with a focus on their success in securing subsequent research income. We report here results from compiling details of the research income of researchers that completed an MRC early career award between 2011 and 2015. Depending on the funding scheme 50-59 per cent of researchers spent on average more than 100,000 GBP per year from new grants secured within three years of finishing their MRC award. In each scheme around 30 per cent of researchers secured less than 50,000 GBP per year research funding in the three years following their MRC award. We apply the same approach to an analysis of progression for the MRC cadre of intramurally-supported Programme Leader Track researchers, and a sample of MRC research grant holders. We also supplement our results with a small number of interviews with researchers that held MRC New Investigator Research Grants. We suggest that these data confirm reasonably good progression rates, with MRC early career schemes demonstrably effective in supporting research careers. They confirm there is a bottleneck with some researchers taking several years to establish their research career, and that expansion of the research base will need balanced new investment across schemes and stages and cannot be driven through growth in early career schemes alone.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge and motivations of training in peer review: an international cross-sectional survey 93%
- Advancing science or advancing careers? Researchers' opinions on success indicators 93%
- Analysis of the Health Economics Portfolio Funded by the National Institutes of Health in Response to Published Guidance 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving modelling for epidemic responses: reflections from members of the UK infectious disease modelling community on their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic 92%
- Transparency and open science reporting guidelines in sleep research and chronobiology journals 90%
- Limits of lockdown: characterising essential contacts during strict physical distancing 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Taxonomy of interventions at academic institutions to improve research quality 93%
- A cross-sectional audit and survey of Open Science and Data Sharing practices at The Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital 93%
- Inflated citations and metrics of journals discontinued from Scopus for publication concerns: the GhoS(t)copus Project 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 94%
- Mapping factors that may influence attrition and retention of midwives: a scoping review protocol 92%
- Participatory research in health intervention studies involving migrants: a systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.