The applied value of public investments in biomedical research
Open accessAbstract
Scientists and policy-makers have long argued that public investments in science have practical applications. Using data on patents linked to U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants over a 27-year period, we provide a large-scale accounting of linkages between public research investments and subsequent patenting. We find that about 10% of NIH grants generate a patent directly but 30% generate articles that are subsequently cited by patents. Although policy-makers often focus on direct patenting by academic scientists, the bulk of the effect of NIH research on patenting appears to be indirect. We also find no systematic relationship between the "basic" versus "applied" research focus of a grant and its propensity to be cited by a patent.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Decisions about allocation of taxpayer dollars influence which scientific ideas receive support, which fields advance, and which investigators are able to initiate and sustain research programs.
“Through competitive grant programs at agencies such as the NSF and the NIH, decisions about the allocation of taxpayer dollars influence which scientific ideas receive support, which fields advance, and which investigators are able to initiate and sustain research programs (3–10).”
From The rise of large language models and the direction and impact of US federal research funding (2026) · cites this paper as [3]
The federal funding process plays a central role in shaping the direction, diversity, and long-run impact of the US scientific enterprise and the global research landscape.
“Thus, the federal funding process plays a central role in shaping the direction, diversity, and long-run impact of the US scientific enterprise and—given America’s scientific leadership—the global research landscape as well (3–10).”
From The rise of large language models and the direction and impact of US federal research funding (2026) · cites this paper as [3]
Cites
Toward a new economics of science
Partha, D., & David, P. A. (1994) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1 · Cited by 2,448 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Batty, G. D., Russ, T. C., Stamatakis, E., & Kivimäki, M. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j108 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
The rise of large language models and the direction and impact of US federal research funding
Qian, Y., Wen, Z., Furnas, A. C., Bai, Y., Shao, E., & Wang, D. (2026) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2601439123 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Li, D., Azoulay, P., & Sampat, B. N.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Danielle
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2017-04-07
- Volume
- 356
- Issue
- 6333
- Pages
- 78-81
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2597693078
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 30.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (award293843, SBE-1460344)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Intellectual Property and Patents
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Research, Science, and Academia
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
- Keywords
- public investment in research, biomedical research, patents, commercialization of research, patent citations, basic versus applied research, science policy, university-industry collaboration
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Humans, Investments, National Institutes of Health (U.S.), Patents as Topic, United States, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
