To ensure a strong and diverse workforce and better understand workforce composition and participation in NIH programs, NIH regularly assesses the sex/gender, race, and ethnicity of its supported researchers.
Dr. Lauer points out that NIH began posting information related to disability status on the NIH Data Book this past February. The data available at this time are limited to the number of principal investigators (PIs) with disabilities supported on certain grants in fiscal year (FY) 2021. More data on disability status are under consideration for release via the Data Book.
The Data
With regard to the number of PIs with disabilities designated on NIH applications and awards over time, the percentage of PIs self-reporting a disability decreased from 2.0 percent in FY 2008 to 1.3 percent in FY 2022.
These data dovetail with other previously published data that indicate that the proportion of NIH-supported researchers reporting disabilities is considerably lower than what is generally found in the U.S. population.
For reference, the CDC’s Disability and Health Overview notes that 26 percent of adults in the United States have some type of disability. NIH’s Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion identifies at Data Analytics that 85.7 percent of NIH staff report having no disability.
We encourage you to explore the data (and methodology) for yourself.
By the Numbers
Table 1. Number of PIs designated on research grant applications and awards self-reporting a disability: FY 2008–2022 reports on categories such as Number of PIs Not Reporting Disability, Number of PIs Missing Disability, and Number of PIs Reporting Disability.
Table 2. Number of PIs designated on research grant applications and awards broken down by disability category: FY 2008 to 2022 focuses on researchers self-reporting a disability, specifically breaking it down by the type of disability. The number of researchers reporting a hearing, mobility/orthopedic, visual, or multiple disabilities trended downward between 2008 and 2022, while the number reporting other disabilities trended upward.
Table 3. Number of unfunded and funded PIs: FY 2008 to 2022 provides data on the number of researchers who were funded (i.e., designated as PI on an NIH grant) or unfunded (i.e., designated as PI on unsuccessful applications) according to their disability reporting status. Similar to Table 2, in general, the number of researchers (be they funded or not) reporting a disability went down between 2008 and 2022, while the number of researchers with other disabilities increased.
Looking Ahead
Going forward, NIH will continue assessing and sharing data related to researchers with disabilities and looking forward to considering the recommendations from the NIH Advisory Commitee to the Director subgroup.
Contact Us
Email us at deaweb@niaid.nih.gov for help navigating NIAID’s grant and contract policies and procedures.
Federica La Russa, Ph.D., former postdoc in the Lymphocyte Biology Section of the Laboratory of Immune System Biology. Trisha Tucholski, Ph.D., former postdoc in the Functional Cellular Networks Section of the Laboratory of Immune System Biology.
Credit:NIAID
By Megan Bohn, Ph.D.
Over the summer, two postdoc alumni of NIAID’s Laboratory of Immune System Biology returned to NIH (virtually) to share how NIH career development resources shaped their careers. Federica La Russa, Ph.D., and Trisha Tucholski, Ph.D., served as speakers on the Science and Health Policy Alumni Panel organized by the NIH Science Policy Discussion Group (SPDG). Both former co-chairs of the SPDG, Drs. La Russa and Tucholski have now moved on to careers that were bolstered by their leadership experiences with the policy group.
“The greatest thing I learned from SPDG is that clearly communicating science is not only essential to support research but also, if not more, to nurture crucial changes in our society as a whole. This helped me to realize that I wanted to be part of that change, contributing to delivering relevant information to people outside of academia, may they be the general public or policymakers,” says Dr. La Russa, now a health communications scientist with a digital media brand in Italy. Dr. Tucholski, an Associate Program Officer with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, also adds that “through the planning of SPDG seminars and panels, I was exposed to the full spectrum of different careers in science policy, which helped me refine my interests and goals. Not to mention, I made key connections through SPDG, and most importantly, a support system and friends I'll carry with me throughout my career!”
About the Science Policy Discussion Group SPDG
The SPDG was first formed by NIH postdoctoral fellows in 2009 as a self-managed group of early-career scientists who wanted to explore science policy and develop their skills. Their blog, “Science Policy For All,” has been running for over a decade and provides many articles that break down a vast array of scientific ideas ranging from antibiotic resistance to stem cell technology and beyond. These blog posts also provide another key opportunity for SPDG fellows: the chance to demonstrate their writing abilities to potential employers, as all panelists at the summer event noted that this had aided their job searches and applications.
To learn more about SPDG or to speak with Drs. Tucholski and La Russa, please send an inquiry to NIAIDTraining@nih.gov.
Learn more about post-doctoral training opportunities at NIAID.
By studying the rare disease APECED, NIAID researchers and colleagues uncovered an unexpected immune mechanism that promotes susceptibility to fungal infections of the mucous membranes. Their findings suggest potential therapies for people with APECED and pave the way for work to investigate these tissue-specific immune responses in other diseases.
Last Reviewed: January 14, 2021
NIAID Workshop Examines Connection between Maternal, Fetal Immune Systems and Improving Reproductive Health
Maternal mortality rates continue to increase in the U.S., outpacing rates of other developed countries. In 2021, 1,025 women in the U.S. died due to pregnancy or childbirth-related causes, compared to 861 women in 2020 and 754 in 2019, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The most common causes contributing to pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. include infection, sepsis, cardiovascular conditions, hypertensive disorders, and hemorrhage. In July, NIAID hosted a workshop of technology developers, immunologists, maternal health researchers and clinicians to explore the importance and challenges of measuring, predicting and improving reproductive health in the context of maternal and fetal immune systems.
Specifically, the workshop focused on leveraging immune metrics to improve diagnosis and care of pregnant individuals. Attendees discussed the role of immune metrics and function during healthy pregnancy compared to adverse pregnancy outcomes, identified technology gaps, and provided insight into strategies for reducing maternal morbidity and mortality. Specific topics of interest included: enhancing existing laboratory and animal models of pregnancy, identifying optimal timing and dosage of vaccination during pregnancy, obtaining minimally invasive samples to explore biomarkers, and defining clinical consensus on preterm birth and labor.
Discussions at the workshop identified multiple areas in which the field of maternal-fetal immunity can continue to advance. One specific identified area of concern was the use of many different animal models across the field that make it difficult to interpret results across studies. Furthermore, findings from animal models are often not translatable to human-relevant outcomes. Harmonization of animal models, as well as availability of improved models of human disease, will better support translational research, the attendees concluded. Additionally, workshop attendees identified a need for more thorough exploration of infection and vaccination during pregnancy to improve vaccination implementation. Existing protocols for vaccination during pregnancy are not backed by substantial evidence, and it is crucial to understand both the necessary dosage of vaccines and the most effective timing of vaccine administration for optimal immune responses for both the mother and fetus. Another point of significant discussion focused on the need to define the biological and molecular processes that lead to preterm birth and preterm labor. It is believed consensus on a biomolecular definition will improve identification and prevention of adverse outcomes.
Attendees acknowledged that identification of biomarkers during pregnancy to detect infection or other complications quickly and accurately is critical to reverse the upward trends in U.S. maternal mortality. Biomarkers that were originally used for screening fetal chromosomal abnormalities have now been found to be helpful for early detection of certain cancers in pregnant individuals is a poignant example. In conjunction with the need for more extensive biomarker research, there is also a need for improving the range of information gleaned from less invasive patient samples, such as peripheral blood and urine.
The workshop also highlighted the necessity of a multidisciplinary collaborative approach to markedly advance the field. Overall, further integration of technology and multiple perspectives across research disciplines to break down research silos was a primary theme across the workshop. Indeed, the incorporation of social sciences exploring inequity and social determinants of health is vital to this field. Access and ability to obtain prenatal care remains a barrier for many to minimize adverse pregnancy outcomes. Research is needed to understand existing inequities and public health action is needed to address these disparities.
In conjunction with the workshop, NIAID and the NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health issued a funding opportunity to support research on immune mechanisms at the maternal-fetal interface. Competitive applications are expected to focus on one or more of the following goals: 1) improving the understanding of the roles and interactions of immune cells at the maternal-fetal interface that support pregnancy and enable optimal placental development and function; or 2) elucidating the mechanisms by which infection and/or vaccination during gestation modulate immune responses in the pregnant individual and alter systemic or tissue-specific immunity in the offspring. This funding opportunity will support projects aimed at addressing many of the ongoing concerns in the field of maternal-fetal immunity identified in the workshop.
Sivarchana Boada, Ph.D., postdoc in the NIH National Biosafety and Biocontainment Training Program (NBBTP), NIH Main Campus
Credit:Sivarchana Boada
By Sivarchana Boada, Ph.D., Susannah Goodman, M.A., and Megan Bohn, Ph.D.
I am a second-year postdoctoral fellow in the National Biosafety and Biocontainment Training Program (NBBTP)/Intramural Research Training Award (IRTA) Fellowship at the NIH. This program prepares me to be a biosafety and biocontainment professional of the highest caliber to meet the needs of biomedical, emerging diseases and biodefense research communities. My training, which focuses on experiential and didactic learning, has afforded me several opportunities to expand my capabilities in biorisk management and communication. These include delivering trainings and conducting laboratory safety surveys, attending the American Biological Safety Association (ABSA) International’s Biosecurity Symposium, and winning the informational poster award at ABSA International’s 65th Annual Biosafety and Biosecurity Conference for my research on understanding the biosafety climate and safety perceptions of research and biosafety professionals.
As I enter the second year of my fellowship and prepare to complete my capstone project, I’ve begun to realize the importance of strong writing skills. Why should a biosafety professional (or scientist, for that matter) care about good writing, you might ask? Brevity is the key to good and effective communication, especially when communicating up with leadership or research laboratory personnel that have competing priorities vying for their limited attention. Regardless of what stage you are in your career, mastery of this skill will serve you well as you apply for research grants, develop standard operating procedures, and share your research findings in reputed journals. If you (like me) are looking to hone your writing skills, the recent skill blitz series on successful academic and professional writing is a great starting point. This skill blitz series was comprised of three sessions that showcased simple strategies to improve writing habits, reduce clutter in writing, and use elements of persuasion to write more effectively.
The Key to Effective Writing Is To Cut the Clutter
We live in a time when everyone is bombarded with information all the time. The consequence of this is that our work, whether it is a grant, a manuscript, or a simple email, is competing for limited attention. If you want your writing to be effective—to win that scarce resource of attention—you must reduce the mental tax on your reader. You do this by using clear, concise language that confidently conveys a strong message.
Good Writing Habits Can Be Used To Sharpen and Refine Ideas
William Zinsser, a classic teacher of non-fiction writing, famously said, “Writing is thinking on paper.” With that in mind, this series talked about how regular writing schedules can be used as a process of idea refinement—of “trapping” thoughts on paper and reworking those ideas until they make perfect logical sense. For instance, if you’re working on a paper, you should write actively while you are still conducting your experiments and not waiting for the perfect time, place, or inspiration to come along. The series cited and described a practical strategy for the order in which to break down and tackle the separate sections of a typical manuscript.
Clear Writing Indicates a Clear Mind
There are a few documents that scientists regularly write where the powers of persuasion come in quite handy. The cover letter for a job application and the specific aims page of a grant proposal come immediately to mind. This series examines sample documents to demonstrate how to write persuasively. The clearest between-the-lines selling-point you can send with your writing is to have a clear command of words, to demonstrate that you are in charge of your message, your narrative, and your goals. The human mind is designed to turn information into stories, and with this fact, the series strongly emphasizes a crucial point: If you don’t supply your narrative, the reader will do it for you, often not to your advantage.
The skill blitz series, through the three modules, taught me valuable skills on developing good writing habits and persuasive writing that I am eager to apply as I write my capstone project and seek employment opportunities during my fellowship. For more information about this series or to view associated materials, please email Dr. Megan Bohn at Megan.Bohn@nih.gov.
Programs and networks help to increase collaboration, break down silos, and share information and data by connecting researchers to each other, to institutions, both public and private, and to the general scientific community.
This section contains information on a variety of types of programs or networks, including those specifically run by NIAID that interact with the broader scientific community and collaborations that NIAID participates in, such as collaborations across government agencies, public-private partnerships, cooperative agreements, and consortiums.
A research program or network is an “umbrella” organizing group, internal or external to NIAID, whose responsibilities include conducting, overseeing, and at times funding research or offering non-monetary support for research. Most of these programs/networks offer services and other resources to the scientific community.
The breadth and depth of NIAID supported programs and networks speaks to the extensive infrastructure that NIAID supports to advance research in a dynamic world impacted by emerging and reemerging diseases.
The Research and Development of Vaccines and Monoclonal Antibodies for Pandemic Preparedness (ReVAMPP) network conducts basic and translational research on representative viruses within a specific virus family, with the goal of developing effective vaccines and monoclonal antibodies for other viruses within that family.
NIAID supports four research networks as part of its HIV clinical research enterprise. Every seven years, the Institute engages research partners, community representatives, and other public health stakeholders in a multidisciplinary evaluation of network progress toward short- and long-term scientific goals.
Data sharing helps advance research on infectious and immune-mediated diseases, and it is required of most NIAID researchers. Learn about the policies that govern data sharing and find guidance on when and where to share scientific data.
How are Programs & Networks Funded?
Networks and programs are funded through a variety of mechanisms varying from funding provided by a grant or contract, collaborations supported through private-public partnerships, defined per partnership, or groups supported wholly by NIAID or NIH, such as various Communities of Practice (COPS) or Special Interest Groups (SIGS).
How do Resources for Researchers Relate to Programs & Networks?
While NIAID supports the research community via funding through grants and other mechanisms, many NIAID networks and programs also provides access to certain resources such as preclinical services, assays, imaging, and sequencing.
How are Programs & Networks Related to Areas of Research at NIAID?
Networks and programs may tie to specific diseases and conditions (for example HIV/AIDS, influenza, or food allergy) or they may support research that is broader in nature, such as vaccines, antimicrobial resistance or immune system research.
Related Information for Researchers
Resources for Researchers
In addition to monetary funding, NIAID or NIAID-funded groups provide services that are available to the research community to advance their scientific pursuits. You may request services if you are an investigator in academia, a nonprofit organization, industry, or government in the United States or worldwide. You need not be a grantee of NIAID or another National Institutes of Health Institute or Center.
NIAID supports research at external academic and research institutions through funding opportunities including grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. In addition to targeted requests for proposals in response to initiatives, NIAID is always accepting researcher-initiated applications.
NIAID promotes partnerships with domestic and international entities to address complex public health issues that require the combined efforts of government agencies, academic institutions, private-sector companies, and nonprofit organizations.
An Aedes mosquito, similar to those studied by Dr. Patricia Scaraffia.
Credit:NIAID
Mosquitoes are considered one of the most dangerous animals on earth because of their broad distribution and the many pathogens they transmit to humans. Some of the most important human diseases in tropical and temperate regions of the planet are caused by mosquito-borne pathogens. Malaria, dengue, and filariasis, among other mosquito-borne diseases, kill or sicken millions of people worldwide every year.
Mosquito-borne pathogens are transmitted to the vertebrate host, such as a human, when the mosquito bites the host in search of blood. The proteins found in blood are essential for female mosquitoes: without it, they lack the resources to create eggs. Greater knowledge of the biological processes involved in the mosquito life cycle could lead to new or improved strategies to control mosquito populations.
Dr. Patricia Scaraffia, Associate Professor at the Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, has dedicated her career to understanding the metabolism of the mosquito Aedes aegypti that carries the pathogens responsible for dengue, Zika, chikungunya, and yellow fever to humans.NIAID reached out to Dr. Scaraffia about her team’s research.
What got you interested in studying mosquito metabolism?
I have studied the metabolism of insects that are vectors of pathogens causing human diseases since I was a graduate student at the Universidad Nacional de Cordoba, in Argentina. My Ph.D. dissertation was focused on the energy metabolism in Triatomine insects, vectors of Trypanosoma cruzi, the etiological agent of Chagas´ disease. After my dissertation, I participated as a speaker in a two-week course for PhD students entitled Biochemistry and molecular biology of insects of importance for public health. During the course, Argentinian professors encouraged me to contact the late Dr. Michael A. Wells, a leader in insect metabolism, and apply for a postdoctoral training in his lab. Soon after, I joined Dr. Wells´s lab at the University of Arizona as a research associate and opened a new line of investigation in his lab. Since then, I have never stopped working on A. aegypti mosquito metabolism. I am passionate and curious about the tremendous complexity of mosquito metabolism. It is a fascinating puzzle to work on. It constantly challenges me and my research team to think outside the box when trying to decipher the unknowns related to mosquito metabolism.
Dr. Patricia Scaraffia's work focuses on the secrets of mosquito metabolism.
Credit:Dr. Patricia Scaraffia
What are the metabolic challenges faced by mosquitoes after feeding on blood?
Female mosquitoes are a very captivating biological system. It is during blood feeding that female mosquitoes can transmit dangerous, and sometimes lethal, pathogens to humans. Interestingly, the blood that the females take could be twice their body weight, which is impressive. Female mosquitoes have evolved efficient mechanisms to digest blood meals, eliminate excess water, absorb and transport nutrients, synthesize new molecules, metabolize excess nitrogen, remove nitrogen waste, and successfully lay eggs within 72 hours! Despite significant progress in understanding how females overcome these metabolic challenges, we have not yet fully elucidated the intricate metabolic pathways, networks, and signaling cascades, nor the molecular and biochemical bases underlying the multiple regulatory mechanisms that may exist in blood-fed female mosquitoes.
What are the greatest potential benefits of understanding mosquito metabolism?
Metabolism is a complicated process that involves the entire set of chemical transformations present in an organism. A metabolic challenge faced by mosquitoes is how to break down ammonia that results from digesting a blood meal and is toxic to the mosquito. With NIAID support, we found that in the absence of a functional metabolic cycle to detoxify ammonia, A. aegypti mosquitoes use specific metabolic pathways that were believed to be non-existent in insects. This discovery has opened a new field of study.
A better understanding of mosquito metabolism and its mechanisms of regulation in A. aegypti and other mosquito species could lead us to the discovery of common and novel metabolic targets and/or metabolic regulators. It would also provide a strong foundation for the development and implementation of more effective biological, chemical and/or genetic strategies to control mosquito populations around the world.
What are the biggest challenges to studying mosquito metabolism?
We have often observed that genetic silencing or knockdown—a technique to prevent or reduce gene expression—of one or more genes encoding specific proteins involved in mosquito nitrogen metabolism results in a variety of unpredictable phenotypes based on our knowledge of vertebrate nitrogen metabolism. Notably, female mosquitoes get control of the deficiency of certain key proteins by downregulating or upregulating one or multiple metabolic pathways simultaneously and at a very high speed. This highlights the tremendous adaptive capacity of blood-fed mosquitoes to avoid deleterious effects and survive.
We have been collaborating closely with scientists that work at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Metabolomics Core Facility, and more recently, with bioanalytical chemists that work in the Microbiome Center’s Metabolomics and Proteomics Mass Spectrometry Laboratory in Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston. Our projects are not turn-key type of projects with quick turn-round times. We have to invest considerable time and effort to successfully develop and/or optimize methods before analyzing mosquito samples. Despite these challenges, our research work keeps motivating us to unlock the metabolic mysteries that female mosquitoes hold.
Your research has focused on Aedes aegypti, the main vector of dengue, Zika, etc.Why did you choose to study this mosquito species rather than others that are also important vectors of malaria and other diseases?
My research has focused on Aedes aegypti not only because it is a vector of pathogens that pose public health threats, but also because it is genetically one of the best-characterized insect species. The availability of the Aedes aegypti genome is a great resource for a wide range of investigations. In addition, Aedes aegypti is relatively simple to rear and maintain in the lab. In my lab, we are interested in expanding our metabolic studies to other mosquito species by working in collaboration with scientists with expertise in the biology of different vectors.
What important questions remain unanswered about mosquito metabolism?
Many important questions remain unanswered about mosquito metabolism. I’d like to highlight a few of them that may help us enhance our knowledge of the mosquito as a whole organism rather than as a linear sum of its parts. For example, what are the genetic and biochemical mechanisms that drive metabolic fluxes in mosquitoes in response to internal or external alterations? How do key proteins interact with each other, and how are they post-translationally regulated to maintain mosquito metabolism? How are the metabolic networks regulated in noninfected and pathogen-infected mosquitoes? What are the critical regulatory points within the mosquito metabolism and the vector-host-pathogen interface?
While basic science will continue to be crucial in answering these questions, to successfully fight against mosquitoes, we must work together as part of a multidisciplinary team of scientists to tightly coordinate our efforts and close the gap between basic and applied science.
Office of Research on Women’s Health and NIH Support for Research on Women’s Health Report of the Advisory Committee on Research on Women’s Health: Fiscal Years 2019–2020 508-compliant PDF
NIH Opening Statement Senate LHHS FY 2019 Hearing: Prepared statement of Lawrence A. Tabak, D.D.S., PH.D., Principal Deputy Director, Office of the Director
