Tessera

Diane Chen, PhD

@drdianechen.bsky.social

Pediatric Psychologist | Professor of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Pediatrics, and Medical Social Sciences | Associate Editor, Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology | she/her | Views my own

37 Posts1322 Follower 567 Folgt

ProPublica @propublica.org · 4mo ago

UnitedHealth is the nation’s largest health insurance conglomerate. ProPublica obtained what is effectively the company’s internal playbook for limiting and cutting therapy costs. Here’s what we found. (Published Nov. 2024)

How UnitedHealth’s Playbook for Limiting Mental Health Coverage Puts Countless Americans’ Treatment at Risk

United used an algorithm system to identify patients who it determined were getting too much therapy and then limited coverage. It was deemed illegal in three states, but similar practices persist due...

propublica.org

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · 9mo ago

Thanks @abctnow.bsky.social for the opportunity to discuss the state of the science and emerging research on gender-affirming medical care for trans youth!

Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 9mo ago

We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing: a 🧵 1/n Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820 Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/... Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...

A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below.

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

A figure detailing the drain on researcher time.

1. The four-fold drain

1.2 Time
The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce,
with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure
1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material
has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs,
grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for
profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time.
The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million
unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of
peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting
widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the
authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many
review demands.
Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of
scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in
‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow
progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to
volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier,
local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with
limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging
with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks
intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.

A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below:

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised
scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers
first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour
resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · 12mo ago

Sign the petition to call for the removal of RFK, Jr. www.standupforscience.net/rfk-impeachm...

Sign the IMPEACH RFK Citizens' Petition to Congress — STAND UP FOR SCIENCE

Join with us to sign our Citizens' Petition to the US Congress to choose the people over Trump and Impeach RFK Jr Now!

standupforscience.net

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · 12mo ago

Article in Nature from a former NIH employee and Bethesda Declaration signer... www.nature.com/articles/d41...

‘A whole body of health-equity research is being disappeared’ — why I resigned from the NIH

As federal support vanishes for research addressing the root causes of health disparities in the United States, we are left with a dangerous void and an urgent need to rethink science funding.

nature.com

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · 12mo ago

Proud to have contributed to this commentary in response to the HHS report on pediatric gender dysphoria urldefense.com/v3/__https:/...

urldefense.com

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · last yr.

Here is the Democracy Now/ACLU brief for the Supreme Court. Thanks to all of the plaintiffs for standing up, and the attorneys and their staffs for all of their hard work. Let's win this thing (again) protectdemocracy.org/wp-content/u...

protectdemocracy.org

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · last yr.

www.cnn.com/2025/08/01/p...

State attorneys general sue Trump over targeting of medical professionals who provide gender identity care to trans youth | CNN Politics

A coalition of Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump administration on Friday over President Donald Trump’s effort to use the Department of Justice to go after medical professionals who pr...

cnn.com

Ian L Morgan @ianlmorgan.bsky.social · last yr.

Here are some of the highlights of the appropriations bill that the Senate appropriations committee just approved: $48.7 billion for NIH, an increase of $400 million Rejects the proposal to cap indirect cost rates at 15% Includes a provision to prevent MYF that would reduce the number of grants

appropriations.senate.gov

Jenna Norton @jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · last yr.

A good explainer for #NIH funded researchers on why the multiyear funding scheme is going to squeeze NIH scientists and NIH science. open.substack.com/pub/sciencea...

A Quiet Policy Shift That Could Devastate American Science

Why NIH’s sudden move to multi-year grant funding should alarm every principal investigator and university

open.substack.com

Jenna Norton @jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · last yr.

Call these 14 senators. Thank them for supporting #NIH. Remind them that supporting NIH is meaningless if NIH cannot function. This stay would: 1) Enable censorship of science. 2) Disrupt NIH’s ability to fund any research.

Ian L Morgan@ianlmorgan.bsky.social · last yr.

Right now, the continuation of many restored NIH grants relies on the SCOTUS shadow docket. SCOTUS is not immune to pressure. Also, if you are represented by one of the 14 R senators that called for the restoration of NIH grants, please write them a thank you. Good behavior should be rewarded.

Jenna Norton @jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · last yr.

If the Supreme Court allows #NIH to terminate ongoing grants because it changed its mind on priorities, it will be the end of NIH and the end of the US as a leader in biomedical science. Period. thehill.com/policy/healt...

thehill.com

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · last yr.

American Psychological Foundation released a call for applications for crisis funding to support early career researchers who had grants terminated. Looks like a great opportunity! ampsychfdn.org/funding/dacf/

Direct Action Crisis Funding - American Psychological Foundation

The APF Direct Action Crisis Funding grants are for activities to address immediate needs following grant cancellations, including completing a wave of data collection, analyzing already collected dat...

ampsychfdn.org

Max Kozlov @maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

NEW: In an unprecedented move, the NIH will soon disinvite dozens of scientists about to take positions on advisory councils that make final decisions on grant funding. NIH staff were told to select others aligned with the Trump administration and told to expect placements by political appointees.

Exclusive: NIH to dismiss dozens of grant reviewers to align with Trump priorities

The move would undo years of work, leaving advisory councils understaffed, and without the full expertise needed for reviews.

nature.com

Jenna Norton @jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · last yr.

So grateful to Katie Edwards for coming forward, for refusing to back down, and for helping lead the charge so many might have their grants reinstated. www.sciencefriday.com/segments/res...

After Her Grants Got Cut, This Researcher Is Suing The NIH

Katie Edwards has lost millions of dollars in grant money, bringing her research to a standstill. She’s taking the fight to court.

sciencefriday.com

Max Kozlov @maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

Just in: NIH staff have been instructed to REINSTATE these ~900 grants to comply with the court order, per sources. This comes after staff were also directed to cease any further terminations. You can see the lists grants to be reinstated in my post below.

Max Kozlov@maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

The judge intends to limit his order to universities in the plaintiff states (CA, MD, WA, AZ, CO, DE, HI, MA, MN, NV, NJ, NM, NY, OR, RI, WI), members of the plaintiff orgs (APHA, UAW), and the researchers named directly, he said today. His written opinion will come in the coming days.

Governor JB Pritzker @govpritzker.illinois.gov · last yr.

Illinois has enshrined protections to meet this very moment. In a time of increasing overreach and hateful rhetoric, it's more important than ever to reaffirm our commitment to the rights and dignity of the LGBTQ+ community. You have a home here always.

The Associated Press@apnews.com · last yr.

BREAKING: The Supreme Court upholds a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors in a huge setback for transgender rights.

Max Kozlov @maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

🚨 BREAKING: Nearly 4 months the NIH cut its first grants, a judge has ruled that the directives and process that led to cuts are arbitrary and capricious. "The explanations are bereft of reasoning — virtually in their entirety... unsupported by [facts]." Each of them are VOID and ILLEGAL, he says.

Post nicht verfügbar.

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · last yr.

“It is palpably clear that these directives and the set of terminated grants here also are designed to frustrate, to stop, research that may bear on the health—we’re talking about health here, the health of Americans, of our LGBTQ community. That’s appalling.” newrepublic.com/post/196887/...

Reagan Appointee: Trump NIH Cuts Represent “Racial Discrimination”

“Have we fallen so low? Have we no shame?” asked Judge William Young, in a ruling that reinstated funding to the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, among other programs.

newrepublic.com

Scott Delaney @scott-delaney.bsky.social · last yr.

⚖️ HUGE day today in the NIH terminations cases There's a trial (of sorts) at 10a ET in Boston today for arguments that NIH unlawfully terminated 100s of grants. It's a 3 hour hearing and I'll post periodic updates. Of note: this is the 1st lawsuit filed against the Trump Admin to go to trial.

ACLU @aclu.org · last yr.

When the National Institutes of Health cut billions of dollars of research funding earlier this year, it jeopardized our wellbeing and scientific progress. We'll be in court Monday arguing that scientific research should be guided by evidence, not politics.

Trump’s cuts to more than 1700 NIH grants get court hearing

District judge could declare terminations unlawful—or toss suit based on technicalities

science.org

Max Kozlov @maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

🚨 NIH director Jayanta Bhattacharya is testifying before the US Senate Appropriations Committee today. The hearing is bound to be spicy, after more than 300 agency staff wrote him a letter decrying his leadership and actions as director. 🔥 I'll be live-posting the hearing, so follow along here.

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · last yr.

A broad group of National Institutes of Health (NIH) public servants have taken action with the "Bethesda Declaration" that targets the NIH and HHS Leadership. Join these courageous and committed professionals by adding your name now. actionnetwork.org/forms/add-na...

ADD YOUR NAME: Sign the Open Letter in Support of NIH Staff

Join the courageous and committed National Institutes of Health (NIH) public servants by adding your name now.

actionnetwork.org

Stand Up for Science!@standupforscience.net · last yr.

“In an unusual act of public protest, more than 340 scientists and staff at the National Institutes of Health today released a statement charging NIH officials and their superiors with politicizing science.” www.science.org/content/arti... #StandUpForScience #BethesdaDeclaration

NIH staff and biomedical community sound alarm about agency politicization, funding slowdown

In test of NIH director’s support of dissent, NIH staff sign Bethesda Declaration urging reversal of grant cuts and freezes

science.org

Stand Up for Science!@standupforscience.net · last yr.

🚨BREAKING: 300+ NIH employees call out the harm of censorship & politicized science in scathing email to Bhattacharya, demanding an end to political interference, a lift on funding freezes, & rehiring of fired staff whose work saves lives. This is historic - insiders are blowing the whistle. 🧵(1/5)

Front-page-style graphic titled “BREAKING NEWS” with photos of RFK Jr. and Dr. Bhattacharya in front of a government hearing chamber. Text reads: “NIH Scientists Sound the Alarm as Health Research Faces Historic Threat” and “NIH Employees Send Trump Cronies Scathing Wake-Up Call.”

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · last yr.

Funding freeze at Northwestern from Emma Mairson at grant-watch.us. Data from USAspending. Normally, ~$70 M per month. Now, bupkis. Northwestern is keeping research moving and must be spending ~$40 M per month. Clearly not sustainable for too long.

Diane Chen, PhD @drdianechen.bsky.social · last yr.

Important piece by Drs. @jaepuckett.bsky.social and Paz Galupo theconversation.com/our-trans-he...

Our trans health study was terminated by the government – the effects of abrupt NIH grant cuts ripple across science and society

The losses include millions of dollars the NIH has already spent on research that will no longer generate results, and the next generation of scientists whose work has been cut short.

theconversation.com

Carl T. Bergstrom @carlbergstrom.com · last yr.

This is your health on MAGA.

Here Are the Nearly 2,500 Medical Research Grants Canceled or Delayed by Trump (Gift Article)

Some cuts have been starkly visible, but the country’s medical grant-making machinery has also radically transformed outside the public eye.

nytimes.com

Max Kozlov @maxkozlov.bsky.social · last yr.

Judge overseeing the NIH grant cuts lawsuit: "I've just come across this database called Grant Watch which is rather intriguing. Everybody seems to look at [it] for the data concerning NIH grants... This is like a physician's desk reference." 👏 well done @scott-delaney.bsky.social @noamross.net

Tom Rodebaugh @drrodebaugh.bsky.social · last yr.

Heads up! APA is urging anyone who cares about health and science to let their reps/senators know now that they should oppose the admin's murder budget. Easy to do here: www.votervoice.net/Shares/BAAAA... APA is plugged in. If they say NOW, listen! #StandUpForScience

ACT NOW! Tell Congress to Reject Unprecedented Funding Cuts

Please take 2 minutes today to urge Congress to reject the administration’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 budget proposal that seeks to cut $163 billion across the federal government. This would have signific...

votervoice.net