Five academic medical centers command 38.4% of the $1.65 billion in NIH radiology funding distributed between 2012 and 2025, with this concentration primarily driven by these institutions hosting larger clinician investigator workforces rather than receiving higher per-investigator funding levels.
- Five institutions accounted for 38.4% of total NIH radiology funding and 34.5% of grants across diagnostic radiology, interventional radiology, and radiation oncology from 2012-2025
- 437 unique clinician investigators received $1.65 billion total, with institutional PI count explaining 82% of funding variance
- Career development awards were limited and unevenly distributed—only 40 K-awards issued to 21 institutions over 14 years, with seven institutions receiving 57.5% of them
- Institutional leaders by subspecialty: Stanford ($134.9M) in diagnostic radiology, UCSF ($36.9M) in interventional radiology, and University of Michigan ($68.1M) in radiation oncology
- Recommended strategies include targeted mentorship programs, multi-institutional collaborations, and increased career development investment at emerging research institutions
Radiology clinician-scientists received $1.65 billion in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding between 2012 and 2025, with five institutions accounting for 38.4% of the total, according to a study published October 29 in the Journal of the American College of Radiology.
A team of U.S. researchers systematically examined the institutional landscape of NIH funding across diagnostic radiology, interventional radiology, and radiation oncology, with findings highlighting opportunities to strengthen clinician-scientist pipelines.
"NIH funding to radiology clinician investigators is concentrated at a small number of academic medical centers, principally because those centers host larger clinician investigator workforces, with a narrow clinician-scientist pipeline," noted Lead authors Ajay Malhotra, MD, and Keervani Kandala, both of Yale University in New Haven, CT, and colleagues.
While prior analyses of NIH funding to radiology departments have characterized aggregate grant volume and funding levels, few studies have systematically examined the institutional landscape of clinician-led research, according to the group.
To bridge the gap, the researchers extracted grant records from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database for fiscal years 2012 to 2025, filtering to principal investigators in departments designated “Radiation-Diagnostic/Oncology” and cross-referencing with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) physician data to identify clinician investigators. They analyzed institutional funding totals, grant counts, unique investigator counts, grant mechanisms, and career development awards.
Journal of the American College of Radiology
Among 437 unique NIH-funded clinician investigators in diagnostic radiology (n = 226), interventional radiology (n = 46), and radiation oncology (n = 165) receiving $1.65 billion across fiscal year 2012 to 2025, the top five institutions accounted for 38.4% of total funding and 34.5% of grants, principally because they host the largest clinician investigator workforces: institutional principal investigator (PI) count explained 82% of the variance in total funding (r = 0.91), and funding per clinician PI was considerably more evenly distributed (Gini 0.38) than total funding (Gini 0.62).
Institutional leadership diverged by subspecialty, with Stanford University leading diagnostic radiology ($134.9M), the University of California, San Francisco leading interventional radiology ($36.9M), and the University of Michigan leading radiation oncology ($68.1M).
Career development investment was limited and unevenly distributed: only 40 new K-awards (Support Year 1) were issued to clinician investigators across 21 institutions over 14 years, with seven institutions accounting for 57.5% of them; radiation oncology carried the highest K-Series share of awards (10.5% of 1,081 awards) versus diagnostic and interventional radiology.
"Clinician-specific NIH funding reveals a subspecialty-divergent institutional landscape in radiology in which leading institutions lead chiefly by hosting more clinician investigators, with limited career development awards that constrains the clinician-scientist pipeline," the group wrote.
Ultimately, the findings have implications for policy and workforce development, the researchers noted. Strategies to broaden the institutional base of NIH-funded clinician research in radiology could include targeted mentorship programs, multi-institutional research collaborations, and increased investment in career development awards at institutions with emerging research programs, they suggested.
"These findings highlight opportunities to broaden research capacity and strengthen clinician-scientist pipelines," the authors concluded.
The full study is available here.
