The discovery value of "Big Science"

Journal of Experimental Medicine

Volumn 204, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 701-704

  Esparza, José ^a   Yamada, Tadataka ^a  

^a BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS VACCINE;

ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

AIDS VACCINES; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; SCIENCE;

EID: 34247335356     PISSN: 00221007     EISSN: 00221007     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20070073     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Weinberg, A.M. 1967. Reflections on Big Science. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA. 182 pp.
2. Sabin, A.B. 1967. Collaboration for accelerating progress in medical research. Science. 156:1568-1571.
3. Barabási, A.-L. 2005. Network theory - the emergence of the creative enterprise. Science. 308:639-641.
4. Price, D.J.D. 1963. Little Science, Big Science. Columbia University Press, New York. 118 pp.
5. Roberts, L. 2001. Controversial from the start. Science. 291:1182-1188.
6. Service, R.F. 2001. Objection #1: big biology is bad biology. Science. 291:1182.
7. Service, R.F. 2001. Objection #3: impossible to do. Science. 291:1186.
8. Collins, F.S., M. Morgan and A. Patrinos. 2003. The human genome project: lessons from large-scale biology. Science. 300:286-290.
9. DeVita, V.T. 2002. A perspective on the war on cancer. Cancer. 8:352-356.
10. DeVita, V.T. 2004. The "war on cancer" and its impact. Nat. Clin. Pract. Oncol. 1:55.
11. Aderem, A., and L. Hood. 2001. Immunology in the post-genomic era. Nat. Immunol. 2:373-375.
12. Klausner, R.D., A.S. Fauci, L. Corey, G.J. Nabel, H. Gayle, S. Berkley, B.F. Haynes, D. Baltimore, C. Collins, R.G. Douglas, et al. 2003. The need for a Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise. Science. 300:2036-2039.
13. Coordinating Committee of the Global HIV/AIDS Vaccine Enterprise. 2005. The Global HIV/AIDS Vaccine Enterprise: Scientific Strategic Plan. PLoS Medicine. 2:111-121.
14. Cohen, J. 2005. New virtual center aims to speed AIDS vaccine progress. Science. 309:541.
15. Cohen, J. 2006. Gates Foundation doubles support for AIDS vaccine research. Science. 313:283.
16. Ho, D.D. 2005. A shot in the arm for AIDS vaccine research. PLoS Medicine. 2:100-101.
17. Basu, P. 2006. Ambitious grants deepen rift between researchers. Nat. Med. 12:865.
18. Butler, D. 2006. AIDS vaccine research becomes "big science." Nature. 442:610-611.
19. Esparza, J. 2005. The Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise. Int. Microbiol. 8:93-101.
20. Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. 172 pp.
21. Stokes, D.E. 1997. Pasteur's quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 180 pp.
22. Zerhouni, E.A. 2006. NIH in the post-doubling era: realities and strategies. Science. 314:1088-1090.
23. Marwick, C. 2003. Big science can be big success, IOM report concludes. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 95:1107.
24. Nass, S.J., and B.W. Stillman, editors. 2003. Large-scale biomedical science: exploring strategies for future research. The National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 280 pp.
25. Weinberg, R.A. 2006. A lost generation. Cell. 126:9-10.
26. Merton, R.K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science. 159:56-63.