Fig. 1: Basic science applications had a higher likelihood of funding compared to clinical/translational research applications. | Journal of Perinatology

Fig. 1: Basic science applications had a higher likelihood of funding compared to clinical/translational research applications.

From: Success and opportunities of the American Academy of Pediatrics Marshall Klaus research grant program in neonatal-perinatal medicine

Fig. 1

A Trend in the number of applicants submitting basic research or clinical/translational research applications from 2015–2024. B Basic vs clinical/translational research composition of projects funded by the Marshall Klaus award by year. Results are shown as percentages and individual research type categories labeled with sample size within the bar. C Percentage of projects funded/number of category-specific applications by year. Results are shown as percentages and individual research-type categories are shown. Statistical comparison of the percentage of category-specific grants funded between basic research and clinical/translational research across all years was made using unpaired t-test with Welch’s correction. P = 0.006. The unpaired t-test with Welch’s correction was chosen as it does not assume the two populations have the same standard deviation. The variances were not different between the groups. The difference between the means (translational/clinical- basic) ±SEM was −19.10 ± 5.841, 95% confidence interval was −31.62 to −6.573.

Back to article page