Meta-research: Justifying career disruption in funding applications, a survey of Australian researchers

  1. Adrian Barnett  Is a corresponding author
  2. Katie Page
  3. Carly Dyer
  4. Susanna Cramb
  1. Queensland University of Technology, Australia
  2. University of Technology Sydney, Australia
  3. Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Abstract

Background: When researchers' careers are disrupted by life events-such as illness or childbirth-they often need to take extended time off. This creates a gap in their research output that can reduce their chances of winning funding. In Australia, applicants can disclose their career disruptions and peer reviewers are instructed to make appropriate adjustments. However, it is not clear if and how applicants use career disruption sections or how reviewers adjust and if they do it consistently.

Methods: To examine career disruption, we used surveys of the Australian health and medical research community. We used both a random sample of Australian authors on PubMed and a non-random convenience sample.

Results: Respondents expressed concerns that sharing information on career disruption would harm their chances of being funded, with 13% saying they have medical or social circumstances but would not include it in their application, with concerns about appearing 'weak'. Women were more reluctant to include disruption. There was inconsistency in how disruption was adjusted for, with less time given for those with depression compared with caring responsibilities, and less time given for those who did not provide medical details of their disruption.

Conclusions: The current system is likely not adequately adjusting for career disruption and this may help explain the ongoing funding gap for senior women in Australia.

Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council Senior Research Fellowship (Barnett).

Data availability

All data and code are openly available here https://github.com/agbarnett/career_disruption

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Adrian Barnett

    School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    For correspondence
    a.barnett@qut.edu.au
    Competing interests
    Adrian Barnett, receives funding from the NHMRC and is a member of the NHMRC Research Committee..
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6339-0374
  2. Katie Page

    Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Carly Dyer

    Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Susanna Cramb

    Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    Susanna Cramb, receives funding from the NHMRC.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1117784)

  • Adrian Barnett

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP2008313)

  • Susanna Cramb

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: Ethics approval was obtained from the Queensland University of Technology human research ethics committee. All participants provided informed consent before completing the survey.

Copyright

© 2022, Barnett et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,642
    views
  • 150
    downloads
  • 4
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Adrian Barnett
  2. Katie Page
  3. Carly Dyer
  4. Susanna Cramb
(2022)
Meta-research: Justifying career disruption in funding applications, a survey of Australian researchers
eLife 11:e76123.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.76123

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.76123

Further reading

    1. Medicine
    Mitsuru Sugimoto, Tadayuki Takagi ... Hiromasa Ohira
    Research Article

    Background:

    Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is a severe and deadly adverse event following ERCP. The ideal method for predicting PEP risk before ERCP has yet to be identified. We aimed to establish a simple PEP risk score model (SuPER model: Support for PEP Reduction) that can be applied before ERCP.

    Methods:

    This multicenter study enrolled 2074 patients who underwent ERCP. Among them, 1037 patients each were randomly assigned to the development and validation cohorts. In the development cohort, the risk score model for predicting PEP was established via logistic regression analysis. In the validation cohort, the performance of the model was assessed.

    Results:

    In the development cohort, five PEP risk factors that could be identified before ERCP were extracted and assigned weights according to their respective regression coefficients: –2 points for pancreatic calcification, 1 point for female sex, and 2 points for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, a native papilla of Vater, or the pancreatic duct procedures (treated as ‘planned pancreatic duct procedures’ for calculating the score before ERCP). The PEP occurrence rate was 0% among low-risk patients (≤0 points), 5.5% among moderate-risk patients (1–3 points), and 20.2% among high-risk patients (4–7 points). In the validation cohort, the C statistic of the risk score model was 0.71 (95% CI 0.64–0.78), which was considered acceptable. The PEP risk classification (low, moderate, and high) was a significant predictive factor for PEP that was independent of intraprocedural PEP risk factors (precut sphincterotomy and inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulation) (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.8–6.3; p<0.01).

    Conclusions:

    The PEP risk score allows an estimation of the risk of PEP prior to ERCP, regardless of whether the patient has undergone pancreatic duct procedures. This simple risk model, consisting of only five items, may aid in predicting and explaining the risk of PEP before ERCP and in preventing PEP by allowing selection of the appropriate expert endoscopist and useful PEP prophylaxes.

    Funding:

    No external funding was received for this work.

    1. Medicine
    Yao Li, Hui Xin ... Wei Zhang
    Research Article

    Estrogen significantly impacts women’s health, and postmenopausal hypertension is a common issue characterized by blood pressure fluctuations. Current control strategies for this condition are limited in efficacy, necessitating further research into the underlying mechanisms. Although metabolomics has been applied to study various diseases, its use in understanding postmenopausal hypertension is scarce. Therefore, an ovariectomized rat model was used to simulate postmenopausal conditions. Estrogen levels, blood pressure, and aortic tissue metabolomics were analyzed. Animal models were divided into Sham, OVX, and OVX +E groups. Serum estrogen levels, blood pressure measurements, and aortic tissue metabolomics analyses were performed using radioimmunoassay, UHPLC-Q-TOF, and bioinformatics techniques. Based on the above research content, we successfully established a correlation between low estrogen levels and postmenopausal hypertension in rats. Notable differences in blood pressure parameters and aortic tissue metabolites were observed across the experimental groups. Specifically, metabolites that were differentially expressed, particularly L-alpha-aminobutyric acid (L-AABA), showed potential as a biomarker for postmenopausal hypertension, potentially exerting a protective function through macrophage activation and vascular remodeling. Enrichment analysis revealed alterations in sugar metabolism pathways, such as the Warburg effect and glycolysis, indicating their involvement in postmenopausal hypertension. Overall, this current research provides insights into the metabolic changes associated with postmenopausal hypertension, highlighting the role of L-AABA and sugar metabolism reprogramming in aortic tissue. The findings suggest a potential link between low estrogen levels, macrophage function, and vascular remodeling in the pathogenesis of postmenopausal hypertension. Further investigations are needed to validate these findings and explore their clinical implications for postmenopausal women.