A physician-scientist preceptorship in clinical and translational research enhances training and mentorship.

BACKGROUND: Dual degree program MD/PhD candidates typically train extensively in basic science research and in clinical medicine, but often receive little formal experience or mentorship in clinical and translational research. METHODS: To address this educational and curricular gap, the University of Wisconsin Medical Scientist Training Program partnered with the University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational Research to create a new physician-scientist preceptorship in clinical and translational research. This six-week apprentice-style learning experience-guided by a physician-scientist faculty mentor-integrates both clinical work and a translational research project, providing early exposure and hands-on experience with clinically oriented research and the integrated career of a physician-scientist. Five years following implementation, we retrospectively surveyed students and faculty members to determine the outcomes of this preceptorship. RESULTS: Over five years, 38 students and 36 faculty members participated in the physician-scientist preceptorship. Based on student self-assessments (n = 29, response rate 76%), the course enhanced competency in conducting translational research and understanding regulation of clinical research among other skills. Mentor assessments (n = 17, response rate 47%) supported the value of the preceptorship in these same areas. Based on work during the preceptorship, half of the students produced a peer-reviewed publication or a meeting abstract. At least eleven peer-reviewed manuscripts were generated. The preceptorship also provided a structure for physician-scientist mentorship in the students' clinical specialty of choice. CONCLUSION: The physician-scientist preceptorship provides a new curricular model to address the gap of clinical research training and provides for mentorship of physician-scientists during medical school. Future work will assess the long-term impact of this course on physician-scientist career trajectories.

Gender Can Influence Student Experiences in MD-PhD Training.

Background: Female physician-scientists have led major advances in medicine broadly and particularly in women's health. Women remain underrepresented in dual MD-PhD degree programs that train many physician-scientists despite gender parity among medical and biomedical research students. Materials and Methods: To explore how the training environment might be experienced differently for male and female students in one MD-PhD program, the authors analyzed gender differences in annual symposium speakers with exact binomial tests, student participation as question-askers at a weekly seminar with logistic regression, and number of publications with quasi-Poisson generalized linear models. They compared male and female students' perceptions of gender-based discrimination using a survey, including qualitative analysis of free text responses. The program consisted of 71 total students in the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years. Female students comprised 42.0% (81/191) of program matriculants from 1997 to 2019. Results: Male and female students were equally likely to present at the annual program symposium, but faculty (p = 0.001) and keynote (p = 0.012) presenters were more likely to be male. Compared with male counterparts, female students asked fewer seminar questions (p < 0.005) and female speakers received more questions (p = 0.03). Female students perceived less support and differed from men in reasons for asking or not asking seminar questions. Free text responses described repeated small acts of discrimination toward women with cumulative impact. Positive program changes followed presentation of findings to program leaders and students. Conclusions: The authors identified several aspects of one MD-PhD program that could discourage career or training persistence of female students. Increasing awareness of these issues was temporally related to positive programmatic changes.