Those who attended the 2007 meeting of the American Roentgen Ray Society last April may have heard the Caldwell Lecture in which Douglas Maynard described the coalescence of the academic radiology community in an effort to expand National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for diagnostic radiology research. Those who did not hear the talk can read it in the October issue of the American Journal of Roentgenology .
It was an excellent talk, rich in the detail of the effort. But there was one glaring error of omission that I want to correct here and now. That was Doug’s modesty in not describing the extent to which his own contributions pushed the research efforts forward. He named some of the others who started the effort and called them his heroes. They are, but his name should go on that list of heroes.
To make my point, look back to the early 1970s. Herbert Abrams, a leader in academic radiology, wrote a letter to his friend Don Frederickson, then NIH director, saying somewhat sharply that diagnostic radiology was not being treated fairly at NIH. There were good reasons for his complaint. The total funding for medical imaging was about $45 million, with half of that amount going to cardiologists and others besides radiologists. The only focus for radiology research at NIH was in the Institute of General Medical Sciences, a small, catch-all agency. Only a few projects, mostly relating to contrast media, were funded from there. It was pointed out that 38% of all radiology proposals were funded. But that meant three of eight, and not much to brag about.
Don Frederickson agreed with Herb Abrams and appointed an ad hoc committee to look into the matter. Russell Morgan of Johns Hopkins was the chairman. It included several radiologists, a surgeon, a cardiologist, and at least one physicist. I supported that study group on an informal basis. In conversations with NIH administrators, we grasped the shape of our problems. We had few applications and no friends in key places. The only radiologists who did well at NIH were the radiation oncologists, who had friends in the National Cancer Institute.
One of the NIH administrators pointed out that if only a few radiologists presented proposals, it was not the fault of NIH that few were funded. The general feeling from most academics was that applying to NIH was a waste of energy because no one at NIH regarded work on radiology techniques or equipment as research. Most of the NIH people were biologists. “You people don’t even kill white mice,” one of them said to me. “How can you say you do research?”
The advisory committee report supported Herb Abrams complaint. Don Frederickson suggested that academic radiology organize an effort to improve the situation. It would not be an official NIH committee, but it would have his ear, he promised.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<