NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Opportunities to Address Clinical Research Workforce Diversity Needs for 2010; Hahm J, Ommaya A, editors. Opportunities to Address Clinical Research Workforce Diversity Needs for 2010. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2006.

Cover of Opportunities to Address Clinical Research Workforce Diversity Needs for 2010

Opportunities to Address Clinical Research Workforce Diversity Needs for 2010.

Show details

Preface

Increasing diversity in the U.S. population has sharpened concerns about the vitality and diversity of the clinical research workforce, concerns that have persisted for two decades. Our nation’s unprecedented level of investment in biomedical research has led to an explosion of new knowledge about human health and disease, but basic research achievements must be translated into treatments and therapies in order to benefit human health. This translation requires clinical research conducted by outstanding scientists, physicians, and other health professionals who understand the complexities and nuances of health and disease among different population groups.

Clinical research as an enterprise has traditionally not received the high level of regard afforded basic research in the research and academic communities, which may be contributing to decreased interest in clinical research careers among matriculating medical students. This must change if we are to continue the pace of achievement in translating gains in basic science to treatment of human disease. All biomedical researchers have a stake in ensuring that the clinical research workforce thrives and diversifies for the benefit of human health.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Academies’ Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.

We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Karen Antman, National Cancer Institute for Translational and Clinical Sciences; Elaine Gallin, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation; Page Morahan, Hedwig van Ameringen Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine Program; Jay Moskowitz, Pennsylvania State University; Joel Oppenheim, New York University; Diane Wara, University of California, San Francisco; and Judith Woodruff, Northwest Health Foundation.

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Elena Nightingale, Institute of Medicine, and Willie Pearson, Georgia Institute of Technology. Appointed by the National Academies, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

E. Albert Reece, M.D.

Chair

Copyright © 2006, National Academy of Sciences.
Bookshelf ID: NBK20269
PubReader format: click here to try

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (950K)

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...