Home › Research › Risk factors
NIH Primary and Secondary Prevention Research in Humans: a Portfolio Analysis of Study Designs Used in 2012-2019
Oyedele Natasha K, Ganoza Luis F, Schully Sheri D, Liggins Charlene A, Murray David M. Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2022-01-23
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
This manuscript examines the research questions being addressed in prevention research by characterizing the distribution and trends of study designs included in primary and secondary prevention research supported by the National Institutes of Health through grants and cooperative agreements, together with the types of prevention research, populations, rationales, exposures, and outcomes associated with each type of design. Observational designs and analyses of existing data dominated, suggesting that much of the prevention research funded by NIH continues to focus on questions of association and on questions of identification of risk and protective factors. Randomized and non-randomized intervention designs were included far less often, suggesting that a much smaller fraction of the NIH prevention research portfolio is focused on questions of whether interventions can be used to modify risk or protective factors or to change some other health-related biomedical or behavioral outcome. The much heavier focus on observational studies is surprising given how much we know already about the leading risk factors for death and disability in the USA, because those risk factors account for 74% of the county-level mortality in the USA, and because they play such a vital role in the development of clinical and public health guidelines, whose developers often weigh results from randomized trials much more heavily than results from observational studies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Oyedele Natasha, K., Ganoza Luis, F., Schully Sheri, D., Liggins Charlene, A., & Murray David, M. (2022). NIH Primary and Secondary Prevention Research in Humans: a Portfolio Analysis of Study Designs Used in 2012-2019. Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01337-9
Vancouver
Oyedele Natasha K, Ganoza Luis F, Schully Sheri D, Liggins Charlene A, Murray David M. NIH Primary and Secondary Prevention Research in Humans: a Portfolio Analysis of Study Designs Used in 2012-2019. Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research. 2022. doi:10.1007/s11121-022-01337-9. PMID: 35064895.
BibTeX
@article{oyedelenatasha2022-35064895,
author = {Oyedele Natasha, K. and Ganoza Luis, F. and Schully Sheri, D. and Liggins Charlene, A. and Murray David, M.},
title = {{NIH Primary and Secondary Prevention Research in Humans: a Portfolio Analysis of Study Designs Used in 2012-2019}},
journal = {Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1007/s11121-022-01337-9},
pmid = {35064895},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01337-9}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- This manuscript examines the research questions being addressed in prevention research by characterizing the distribution and trends of study designs included in primary and secondary prevention research supported by the National Institutes of Health through grants and cooperative agreements, together with the types of prevention research, populations, rationales, exposures, and outcomes associated with each type of design.
- Observational designs and analyses of existing data dominated, suggesting that much of the prevention research funded by NIH continues to focus on questions of association and on questions of identification of risk and protective factors.
- Randomized and non-randomized intervention designs were included far less often, suggesting that a much smaller fraction of the NIH prevention research portfolio is focused on questions of whether interventions can be used to modify risk or protective factors or to change some other health-related biomedical or behavioral outcome.
- The much heavier focus on observational studies is surprising given how much we know already about the leading risk factors for death and disability in the USA, because those risk factors account for 74% of the county-level mortality in the USA, and because they play such a vital role in the development of clinical and public health guidelines, whose developers often weigh results from randomized trials much more heavily than results from observational studies.
Why it matters
This analysis of NIH prevention research funding found that observational studies and analyses of existing data dominated, while intervention studies were far less common. It describes the research portfolio and reports no findings about treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Effect size63.3%; 61.5%; 65.0%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Prevention Science: journal h-index 132 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-17) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.3 citations a year over 6 year(s) since 2022 |
| Impact for its field and year | 1 / 6 | Cited 0.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 1 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author David M. Murray: h-index 90 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | National Institutes of Health: institution h-index 2,707 (OpenAlex) |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35064895) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 40 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Risk factors
Also in Risk factors
356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.