About ASBMR

ASBMR 2005 Strategic Retreat

June 2, 2005
San Diego, California, USA

Welcome and Introduction

Dr. Christakos noted the common themes were the need to:

• Provide more mentoring opportunities for young investigators
• Maintain a link between basic and clinical science at the ASBMR Annual Meeting
• Increase international representation in ASBMR leadership

ASBMR President-Elect Elizabeth Shane reported on individual Committee Chair conference calls held with Ms. Goldberg. She briefly reviewed issues discussed by Committee Chairs and expressed concern about the increased Committee workload.

Discussion noted the need for:

• Condensed Committee reports between Council Meetings to update Council regarding timely issues under Committee consideration
• Adding more members to some Committees to handle the increased workload

Ms. Goldberg noted that Council members receive her monthly updates that review ASBMR’s financial status and include updates on Committee and staff progress.

Background Information and Trends

Ms. Goldberg discussed the five topics to be discussed during the small group sessions:

• Promoting Independent Careers for Young Investigators
• Growing and Diversifying Membership
• Advocating for Increased Research Funding and Science-Friendly Policies
• Influencing Regulatory Process, Guideline Development, Curricula
• Developing Long-term Financial Planning and Program Diversification

Discussion from the presentation noted the need to:

• Focus on mid-career level members and sustaining careers in bone
• Target the ASBMR members (more than 50 percent of membership) who do not attend the Annual Meeting
• Explore adding additional benefits and opportunities for physicians, investigators and basic scientists (i.e., providing educational resources and/or additional venues for continuing medical education credits) [Note: ASBMR already provides CMEs.]
• Identify similar international groups and offer to assist with international advocacy efforts

Ms. Goldberg noted:

• ASBMR Advocacy Committee charges and the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology’s (FASEB’s) focus are not duplicative.
• ASBMR partners with many organizations [including FASEB, Bone Coalition, U.S. Bone and Joint Decade (USBJD), and Friends of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)] to move the concerns of ASBMR members forward.

Small Group Sessions

Group One: Promoting Independent Careers for Young Investigators (YIs)
Group Facilitator: Education Committee Chair Teresita Bellido
Group Members: Daniel Bikle, Thomas Spelsberg, Adrienne Lea, Kimberly Seyran, Amy Werner and Kiley Thornton

Questions

1. What are key obstacles to young investigators’ career success?

• Transition from training to independent career (difficult to obtain a tenure track position and/or grant funding)
• Insufficient funding to cover salary
• Need for mentoring (senior scientist grant support, help writing grants, assistance obtaining information about available funding)
• Need for increased financial support – M.D. trainee salaries are usually higher than Ph.D. trainee salaries as their scientific research/laboratory backgrounds are less comprehensive
• Need for longer period of support – M.D. trainees often research with a less rigorous/extensive research background than Ph.D. trainees

2. How can ASBMR best help nurture the careers of YIs in the current – and likely to continue – tight funding climate?

• Expand CEA eligibility to encompass faculty not eligible for tenure as many researchers are never offered the possibility of tenure.

3. What other initiatives might the Society undertake to help foster the career development of YIs?

• Provide bridge funding to help cover salary costs (match K awards).
• Increase opportunities for networking and visibility:
  • Provide more small meeting opportunities with young investigators and senior scientists (networking, posters, oral presentations, etc.).
  • Invite young investigators to Council dinners (again).
  • Constitute a young investigator task force or committee to provide more comprehensive feedback to ASBMR leaders about avenues to support young investigators.
  • Encourage the ASBMR to appoint Young Investigator Award recipients as session chairs at future ASBMR Annual Meetings.

4. How can ASBMR help mid-career members?

• Provide grant pre-review
• Provide opportunities for collaboration – maybe through the mentorship website
• Provide guidance re: additional sources of research funding

Group Two: Growing and Diversifying Membership
Group Facilitator: Membership Development Committee Chair Andre van Wijnen
Group Members: Susan Greenspan, Fred Singer, Theresa Guise, John Eisman, René Rizzoli and Douglas Fesler

Questions

1. How should the Society continue to grow and diversify its membership?
2. How does the Society prepare for an aging/retiring membership?

Consensus: The Society needs to maintain sustainable growth and continue to attract young investigators to the bone field and to membership in the Society.

• Target membership to “pure” clinicians (not just to researchers)
• Increase membership outreach to international clinicians and researchers
• Increase international leadership on Council and Committees

3. Are there groups we are overlooking?

• Increase membership outreach to other disciplines (i.e., biologists).

4. Should we market membership to non-researcher clinicians?

• Continue to work with other groups to develop clinical guidelines.

5. Are there additional benefits ASBMR should offer to attract more members?

• Explore whether or not the Society is meeting the needs of its international membership and what other benefits could be offered.

Group Three: Advocating for Increased Research Funding and Science-Friendly Policies
Group Facilitator: Science Policy Committee Chair Philip Osdoby
Group Members: Fredrick Kaplan, Vicki Rosen, Robert Nissenson, Bernard Halloran and Gary Stein

Questions

1. What is the extent of time and resources that should be devoted to internationalizing advocacy efforts?

• Develop an International Advisory Group:
  • Invite four or five member representatives from countries with the highest membership to discuss common U.S.-international issues. (Issues could relate to funding and promoting bone research support.)
  • Consider promoting U.S.-International meeting opportunities for joint funding.

2. Are there other innovative strategies ASBMR should pursue?

• Consider adopting an interdisciplinary approach to advocacy.
  • Invite ASBMR members to contact Program Directors at NIH and other agencies to advocate for more funding for bone and mineral research (emphasizing the impact on general health when problems in the musculoskeletal system develop).
• Consider developing a mechanism for a grassroots advocacy approach that’s directed to the public.
  • Consider inviting sports and/or celebrity spokespersons to participate in musculoskeletal TV, radio, and Internet public service announcements (PSAs).
    • What would it cost?
    • What types of coalitions would be required?
    • Should ASBMR consider this?
  • Consider developing with the ASBMR Education and Publication Committees a thematic and periodical publication, “Bench to Bedside Advances in Musculoskeletal Research” (based on FASEB’s Breakthroughs in Biosciences).
  • Publication could be used for education of the lay public and for U.S. Congressional advocacy efforts.
  • Consider a web-based tool for educating ASBMR members on how to contact Congressional leaders and advocate for bone research funding.

3. Are ASBMR advocacy efforts appropriately invested?

• Consider both working with new/existing coalitions and how to better interface with FASEB and the Bone Coalition.
• Consider joining with patient advocates on Hill meetings [Note: This already occurs regularly with the Bone and NIAMS Coalitions.]
• Focus more advocacy on the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to expand its Bone Health and Military Medical Readiness Research Program.

Group Four: Influencing Regulatory Process, Guideline Development, Curricula
Group Facilitator: Professional Practice Committee Chair Stuart Silverman
Group Members: Sundeep Khosla, Julie Glowacki, Jane Cauley, Gretchen Bretsch, Earline Marshall and Rebecca Boulos

Questions

1. Should ASBMR continue its investment in a regulatory focus?

• ASBMR’s mission includes promoting research excellence, but does this include influencing regulatory policy and process?
  • Mission may need to change to reflect “new” direction.
  • Need to discern what ASBMR members want.

2. Should ASBMR take the lead on developing physician guidelines?

• ASBMR is the leader in bone research and science and its mission is to translate the latest science into clinical practice.
• ASBMR’s mission also is to educate physicians.
• ASBMR has not traditionally focused on guideline development.
  • Guidelines are expensive.
  • Other organizations like NOF have taken the lead.
  • ASBMR developed position statement for hormone therapy and WHI.
  • Should the Society continue to be selective?

3. Should ASBMR consider more partnerships with other organizations (such as NOF) to assist with the creation of guidelines?

4. How would the Society decide what areas to focus on in developing guidelines?

• The following questions should be answered:
  • Could the guidelines have an impact on influencing the regulatory process?
  • Does ASBMR have the time, expertise and resources to invest in developing the guidelines?
  • What is the perspective of the Society? Will the guidelines be more evidenced-based [than any already existing]?
  • Is there is a void that the guidelines could fill?

Group Five: Developing Long-term Financial Planning and Program Diversification
Group Facilitator: ASBMR Secretary-Treasurer Marc Drezner
Group Members: Joseph Lorenzo, Karen Hasson, Heather Price and Yvette Dalka

Questions

[Note: This group was given four questions. None were addressed in the final report but a process, philosophy and practical strategies were outlined. New questions were added as well. Italicized items from the group discussion are added below.]

[Note: Questions: (1) What is the best balance? (2) What are appropriate goals for diversification? (3) What is the best timeline? (4) What are dangers of steady state?]

The group noted that long-term planning requires attention to both practical and philosophical issues.

• Practical
  • Translate the Primer.
  • Market ASBMR membership to South America.
  • Distribute parts of the JBMR (article reprints).
  • Hold single national or regional series of ASBMR-sponsored osteoporosis courses for physicians. Seek industry support.
  • Develop Primer Handbook and other spin off products.
• Philosophical
  • When are expenses too high in a given area or not commensurate with revenue?
  • Is the Society relying too much on industry support?
  • Is the Society willing to cut old programs to start new programs?

  Dr. Drezner noted that the Society has recently undertaken ten-year projections.

• What We Know
  • Expenses increase annually.
  • Revenue is not predictable.
• Related Questions
  • What programs/projects/priorities should be cut?
  • What does the Society need to do to maintain current resources?
• Recommendation
  • Constitute a task force to review the Society’s long-term financial strategy.

Wrap Up

ASBMR Councilor Thomas Spelsberg thanked all of the Committee Chairs for their hard work and for providing reports to Council.

ASBMR Council member Gary Stein thanked Ms. Goldberg and Drs. Christakos and Shane for a well organized and effective Council Retreat.

Dr. Christakos adjourned the meeting at 3:01 p.m.