|T H E N I H C A T A L Y S T||J A N U A R Y - F E B R U A R Y 1 9 9 7|
CALL FOR CATALYTIC REACTIONS
In this issue, we are asking for your reactions in four areas: how best
to improve the climate for clinical research at NIH; how to maximize the
value of the new ombudsman office; your advice to Harold Varmus on how an
NIH director might satisfy public, scientific, and one's own research
interests in equal - or near-equal - measure; and the vacationing Hot
Methods Clinic (yes, this last item is a repeat from last issue's "call";
you're getting a second chance).
1) What do you think of the efforts under way to enhance the appeal and feasibility of clinical research as a focus for NIH scientists? Are they sufficient? Are they necessary?
2) What issues would best be handled by an ombudsman? Are there ways to ensure that the office is truly accessible to everyone without its becoming overburdened? How could instructive dispute resolutions be publicized without violating confidentiality?
3) What do you see as priorities for the NIH director, in general and in the next three years specifically?
4) The Hot Methods Clinic is returning next issue. What updates can you provide on previous Hot Methods? What techniques would you like to see covered in the future?
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
National Institutes of Health
Building 1, Room 334
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Return to the Table of Contents