The report says that important organizational changes are needed at the National Institutes of Health to ensure the agency meets future challenges effectively. In particular, the report advises NIH to devote additional resources to innovative interdisciplinary research that reflects its strategic objectives and cuts across all agency's institutes and centers. The report recommends that Congress should establish a formal process for determining how specific proposals for changes in the number of NIH agencies and centers should be addressed.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the single largest funder of health research in the United States, and research it has supported has been pivotal to the explosion of biomedical knowledge over the past century. As NIH's success has grown, so has pressure from advocacy groups and other members of the public to devote more spending to their health concerns. In response to a request from Congress, this IOM study reviewed NIH's research priority-setting process and made recommendations for possible improvement. The committee considered the: Factors and criteria used by NIH to make funding allocations. Process by which the funding decisions are made. Mechanisms for public input. Impact of congressional statutory directives on funding decisions. Among other recommendations, the book recommends that NIH seek broader public input on decisions about how to spend its nearly $14 billion budget; it also urged the agency to create new Offices of Public Liaison in the Office of the Director and in each of the 21 research institutes to allow interested people to formally take part in the process.

The past half-century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research. The growing scale of science has been accompanied by a shift toward collaborative research, referred to as "team science." Scientific research is increasingly conducted by small teams and larger groups rather than individual investigators, but the challenges of collaboration can slow these teams' progress in achieving their scientific goals. How does a team-based approach work, and how can universities and research institutions support teams? Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups. It also examines institutional and organizational structures and policies to support science teams and identifies areas where further research is needed to help science teams and groups achieve their scientific and translational goals. This report offers major public policy recommendations for science research agencies and policymakers, as well as recommendations for individual scientists, disciplinary associations, and research universities. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science will be of interest to university research administrators, team science leaders, science faculty, and graduate and postdoctoral students.

The nature of biomedical research has been evolving in recent years. Technological advances that make it easier to study the vast complexity of biological systems have led to the initiation of projects with a larger scale and scope. In many cases, these large-scale analyses may be the most efficient and effective way to extract functional information from complex biological systems. Large-Scale Biomedical Science: Exploring Strategies for Research looks at the role of these new large-scale projects in the biomedical sciences. Though written by the National Academies' Cancer Policy Board, this book addresses implications of large-scale science extending far beyond cancer research. It also identifies obstacles to the implementation of these projects, and makes recommendations to improve the process. The ultimate goal of biomedical research is to advance knowledge and provide useful innovations to society. Determining the best and most efficient method for accomplishing that goal, however, is a continuing and evolving challenge. The recommendations presented in Large-Scale Biomedical Science are intended to facilitate a more open, inclusive, and accountable approach to large-scale biomedical research, which in turn will maximize progress in understanding and controlling human disease.