RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with high levels of external research funding in order to provide departments with information that may help them increase their external research funding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: National Institutes of Health (NIH) data on grants were analyzed to identify the 72 radiology departments receiving funds for diagnostic radiology research. A survey was sent to these departments. We placed them into one of three categories according to total NIH funds to the department. The survey asked about department characteristics such as size; breakdown of full-time faculty among MDs, MD/PhDs, and PhDs; research space; equipment type; and number and types of trainees. RESULTS: Thirty-nine surveys were returned, including 20 from the 21 departments with the most NIH funding. PhDs played a larger role in the most research funding-intensive departments than in others. These departments also were more likely than others to give protected time to all MDs and to devote over 5% of clinical revenues to research, and they had a lower clinical workload per MD. NIH was the source of 70% of their research funding, The role of MD/PhDs and research space per 1000 research dollars did not vary by research intensity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings only demonstrate associations; they do not show the direction of causality. Nonetheless, they suggest what departments need to do if they wish to increase their external research funding.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with high levels of external research funding in order to provide departments with information that may help them increase their external research funding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: National Institutes of Health (NIH) data on grants were analyzed to identify the 72 radiology departments receiving funds for diagnostic radiology research. A survey was sent to these departments. We placed them into one of three categories according to total NIH funds to the department. The survey asked about department characteristics such as size; breakdown of full-time faculty among MDs, MD/PhDs, and PhDs; research space; equipment type; and number and types of trainees. RESULTS: Thirty-nine surveys were returned, including 20 from the 21 departments with the most NIH funding. PhDs played a larger role in the most research funding-intensive departments than in others. These departments also were more likely than others to give protected time to all MDs and to devote over 5% of clinical revenues to research, and they had a lower clinical workload per MD. NIH was the source of 70% of their research funding, The role of MD/PhDs and research space per 1000 research dollars did not vary by research intensity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings only demonstrate associations; they do not show the direction of causality. Nonetheless, they suggest what departments need to do if they wish to increase their external research funding.