HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Guillory, V. Articles by Sharp, G Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Guillory, V. Articles by Sharp, G

Although research is a critical component of academic medicine, it has not been a significant component of osteopathic medicine. For years, leaders in the osteopathic medical profession have called for increased research in osteopathic medical schools. The need for cost-effective clinical practice leading to improved clinical outcomes creates a necessity for conducting well-designed clinical outcomes research related to osteopathic practice. The authors assess the growth in research at osteopathic academic medical centers from 1989-1999. The amounts of extramural funding at each school, sources of funding, types of research funded, departments funded, and investigators' degree types are also assessed. During the 10 years analyzed, total research funding increased 37%. Twenty-five percent of the grants and 55% of the funding to colleges of osteopathic medicine were from the National Institutes of Health. Most (63%) grants were awarded to PhD faculty. Most research was conducted in the basic biomedical sciences. Clinical research related to osteopathic practices appears to be a relatively minor component of research at osteopathic medical centers.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Weissmann Back to Basic Science: Time for Another Flexner Report FASEB J, September 1, 2008; 22(9): 3097 - 3100. [Full Text] [PDF]