The 1998 Committee on Space Biology and Medicine (CSBM) report A Strategy for Research in Space Biology and Medicine in the New Century assessed the known and potential effects of spaceflight on biological systems in general and on human physiology, behavior, and performance in particular, and recommended directions for research sponsored over the next decade by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The present follow-up report reviews specifically the overall content of the biomedical research programs supported by NASA in order to assess the extent to which current programs are consistent with recommendations of the Strategy report for biomedical research activities. In general, NASA programs concerned with fundamental gravitational biology are not considered here. The committee also notes that this report does not include an evaluation of NASA's response to the Strategy report, which had only recently been released at the initiation of this study. Review of NASA's Biomedical Research Program summarizes the committee's findings from its review of (1) NASA's biomedical research and (2) programmatic issues described in the Strategy report that are relevant to NASA's ability to implement research recommendations.

The 1998 Committee on Space Biology and Medicine (CSBM) report A Strategy for Research in Space Biology and Medicine in the New Century assessed the known and potential effects of spaceflight on biological systems in general and on human physiology, behavior, and performance in particular, and recommended directions for research sponsored over the next decade by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The present follow-up report reviews specifically the overall content of the biomedical research programs supported by NASA in order to assess the extent to which current programs are consistent with recommendations of the Strategy report for biomedical research activities. In general, NASA programs concerned with fundamental gravitational biology are not considered here. The committee also notes that this report does not include an evaluation of NASA's response to the Strategy report, which had only recently been released at the initiation of this study. Review of NASA's Biomedical Research Program summarizes the committee's findings from its review of (1) NASA's biomedical research and (2) programmatic issues described in the Strategy report that are relevant to NASA's ability to implement research recommendations.

Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks: 2013 Letter Report is the first in a series of five reports from the Institute of Medicine that will independently review more than 30 evidence reports that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has compiled on human health risks for long-duration and exploration space flights. This report builds on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books: A Letter Report, which provided an initial and brief review of the evidence reports. This letter report reviews three evidence reports and examines the quality of the evidence, analysis, and overall construction of each report; identifies existing gaps in report content; and provides suggestions for additional sources of expert input. The report analyzes each evidence report's overall quality, which included readability; internal consistency; the source and breadth of cited evidence; identification of existing knowledge and research gaps; authorship expertise; and, if applicable, response to recommendations from the 2008 IOM letter report.

At the request of NASA, an IOM committee reviewed NASA Human Research Program's (HRP's) Scientific Merit Assessment Processes for directed research. Directed research is commissioned or noncompetitively awarded research that is not competitively solicited because of specific reasons, such as time limitations or highly focused or constrained research topics. The scientific merit assessment processes have been developed by NASA to evaluate individual directed research tasks in order to ensure the scientific integrity of the HRP's directed research portfolio. The committee examined the HRP's current scientific merit assessment processes and conducted a public workshop to identify best practices among other federal agencies that use various assessment processes for similar types of directed research. Review of NASA Human Research Program's Scientific Merit Processes: Letter Report finds that the scientific merit assessment process used by the HRP for directed research is scientifically rigorous and is similar to the processes and merit criteria used by many other federal agencies and organizations - including the Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, and the United States Department of Agriculture - for comparable types of research. This report also makes recommendations on ways to streamline and bolster the accountability and transparency of NASA's current processes.

At the request of NASA, an IOM committee reviewed NASA Human Research Program's (HRP's) Scientific Merit Assessment Processes for directed research. Directed research is commissioned or noncompetitively awarded research that is not competitively solicited because of specific reasons, such as time limitations or highly focused or constrained research topics. The scientific merit assessment processes have been developed by NASA to evaluate individual directed research tasks in order to ensure the scientific integrity of the HRP's directed research portfolio. The committee examined the HRP's current scientific merit assessment processes and conducted a public workshop to identify best practices among other federal agencies that use various assessment processes for similar types of directed research. Review of NASA Human Research Program's Scientific Merit Processes: Letter Report finds that the scientific merit assessment process used by the HRP for directed research is scientifically rigorous and is similar to the processes and merit criteria used by many other federal agencies and organizations - including the Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, and the United States Department of Agriculture - for comparable types of research. This report also makes recommendations on ways to streamline and bolster the accountability and transparency of NASA's current processes.

Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks 2015 Letter Report is the third in a series of five reports from the Institute of Medicine that will independently review more than 30 evidence reports that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has compiled on human health risks for long-duration and exploration space flights. This report builds on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books: A Letter Report, which provided an initial and brief review of the evidence reports. This letter report reviews seven evidence reports and examines the quality of the evidence, analysis, and overall construction of each report; identifies existing gaps in report content; and provides suggestions for additional sources of expert input. The report analyzes each evidence report's overall quality, which included readability; internal consistency; the source and breadth of cited evidence; identification of existing knowledge and research gaps; authorship expertise; and, if applicable, response to recommendations from the 2008 IOM letter report.

Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks 2014 Letter Report is the second in a series of five reports from the Institute of Medicine that will independently review more than 30 evidence reports that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has compiled on human health risks for long-duration and exploration space flights. This report builds on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books: A Letter Report, which provided an initial and brief review of the evidence reports. This letter report reviews seven evidence reports and examines the quality of the evidence, analysis, and overall construction of each report; identifies existing gaps in report content; and provides suggestions for additional sources of expert input. The report analyzes each evidence report's overall quality, which included readability; internal consistency; the source and breadth of cited evidence; identification of existing knowledge and research gaps; authorship expertise; and, if applicable, response to recommendations from the 2008 IOM letter report.

As part of its ongoing commitment to the nation's space program, NASA's medical leadership asked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review specific aspects of the scientific basis, policies, and procedures associated with the Longitudinal Study of Astronaut Health (LSAH). NASA created the LSAH in 1992 to address a variety of issues, including both the health of astronauts during space flight and the longer-term health issues that might be associated with space flight and flight training.