NIH Dollars and FP Doctors and Rural Doctors
Robert C. Bowman, M.D.

NIH Funding may have some impact, but it is possible to have good research funding and graduate rural and family physicians. Other studies note that some departments of family medicine found it difficult to balance research with recruitment of residents. This may also be a function of inadequate funding for the multiple areas involved. Regression studies by Rosenblatt showed a weak negative correlation between research and rural graduation rates. Repeat studies by Bowman on demonstrated effects that were less than significant. Rural interested students do not tend to choose research. Characteristics of Rural Interested Students  Recent concerns were raised regarding changes in curricula at Stanford. However over 80% of the students at this school are involved in research. This decision appears to be an attempt to compete well for the most likely researchers. Smaller class size schools such as Duke and Stanford have overall little impact on workforce. The problem may come when other schools, with less emphasis on research and less resources, attempt to emulate the Stanford model.

The following table notes averages for all US schools with a mean of 0.44% choosing research careers as listed in the AMA masterfile for graduates from 1965 - 2000. The rank of the school by school with highest % of researchers is given. The column at the right is FP match data from AAFP for 2003. The real primary care graduations are just as low in high research schools. The table after this one lists NIH dollars and total FP docs graduated 1997 to 2003 and % choosing rural practice.