{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["report2"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":1,"defined_names":1,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"report2","index":0,"n_rows":25,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":25,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,2,0,3],[0,4,0,5],[1,2,1,3],[1,4,1,5],[2,2,2,3],[3,2,3,3],[10,2,10,3],[11,2,11,3],[12,2,12,3],[13,2,13,3],[16,2,16,3],[17,2,17,3],[21,2,21,3]],"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
[null,"1.","Record Nr.",null,"UNINA9910965699703321"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"Scientific opportunities and public needs : improving priority setting and public input at the National Institutes of Health / / Committee on the NIH Research Priority-Setting Process, Health Sciences Policy Program, Health Sciences Section, Institute of Medicine"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Washington, D.C., : National Academy Press, 1998"]
[null,null,"ISBN",null,"9786610186853"]
[{"$nulls":4},"9781280186851"]
[{"$nulls":4},"1280186852"]
[{"$nulls":4},"9780309591959"]
[{"$nulls":4},"0309591953"]
[{"$nulls":4},"9780585022000"]
[{"$nulls":4},"0585022003"]
[null,null,"Edizione",null,"[1st ed.]"]
[null,null,"Descrizione fisica",null,"1 online resource (136 p.)"]
[null,null,"Disciplina",null,"610.72073"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Medicine - Research - Government policy - United States - Citizen participation"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Public health - Research - Government policy - United States - Citizen participation"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Federal aid to medical research - United States"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Inglese"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,null,null,"Note generali","Bibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph"]
[null,null,null,"Nota di bibliografia","Includes bibliographical references (p. 81-83)."]
[null,null,"Nota di contenuto",null,"Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs -- Copyright -- REVIEWERS -- Preface -- Acronyms -- Contents -- Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs -- Executive Summary -- CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY SETTING -- PRIORITY-SETTING PROCESSES -- MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC INPUT -- CONGRESSIONAL ROLE -- 1 Introduction -- BACKGROUND -- Funding Allocation by Institute and Center -- Funding Allocation by Mechanism -- Funding Allocation by Type of Research -- Funding Allocation by Disease -- RECENT TRENDS AND ISSUES -- IOM COMMITTEE PROCESS -- ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT -- 2 Criteria for Priority Setting -- WHY CRITERIA ARE IMPORTANT -- NIH'S CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY SETTING -- Criterion 1. Public Health Needs -- Criterion 2. Quality of Research Supported -- Criterion 3. Scientific Opportunity -- Criterion 4. Portfolio Diversification -- Criterion 5. Adequate Infrastructure Support -- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- 3 "]
[{"$nulls":4},"Priority-Setting Processes -- PRIORITY SETTING THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS -- NIH DIRECTOR'S ROLE IN PRIORITY SETTING -- Transfer Authority -- Discretionary Fund -- NIH Areas of Research Emphasis -- Advisory Committee to the Director -- PRIORITY SETTING AT THE INSTITUTE LEVEL -- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- 4 Mechanisms for Public Input -- PUBLIC INPUT INTO PRIORITY SETTING -- RECENT CHANGES -- TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION BETWEEN NIH AND THE PUBLIC -- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- Offices of Public Liaison: Rationale, Roles, and Responsibilities -- Director's Council of Public Representatives: Rationale, Roles, and Responsibilities -- Policy and Program Advisory Group Membership -- Summary -- 5 Congressional Role -- CONGRESS AND NIH -- How Congress Communicates Priorities -- Appropriations Process -- Authorization Process -- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- References -- Appendixes."]
[{"$nulls":4},"A Federal Advisory Committees of the National Institutes of Health -- OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR -- NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE -- NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE -- NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE -- NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DENTAL RESEARCH -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE -- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH -- NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE -- WARREN GRANT MAGNUSON CLINICAL CENTER -- JOHN E. FOGARTY INTERNATIONAL CENTER -- NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES -- CENTER FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY -- CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW -- B Acknowledgments -- PANELISTS -- WRITTEN COMMENTS -- Individuals -- Organizations -- INTERVIEWS AND OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS -- C National Institutes of Health Funding Tables -- D Committee and Staff Biographies -- COMMITTEE BIOGRAPHIES -- STAFF BIOGRAPHIES."]
[null,null,null,"Sommario/riassunto","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."]