Virtual BUILD Research Collaboratory: A biomedical data science training using innovative pedagogy to address structures of racism and inequitable stress for undergraduates of color.

OBJECTIVE: The unprecedented events of 2020 required a pivot in scientific training to better prepare the biomedical research workforce to address global pandemics, structural racism, and social inequities that devastate human health individually and erode it collectively. Furthermore, this pivot had to be accomplished in the virtual environment given the nation-wide lockdown. METHODS: These needs and context led to leveraging of the San Francisco Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (SF BUILD) theories of change to innovate a Virtual BUILD Research Collaboratory (VBRC). The purpose of VBRC was to train Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) students to apply their unique perspectives to biomedical research. These training activities were evaluated using a pre-post survey design that included both validated and new psychosocial scales. A new scale was piloted to measure culturally relevant pedagogy. RESULTS: VBRC scholars increased science identity on two items: thinking of myself as a scientist (+1point, p = 0.006) and belonging to a community of scientists (+1point, p = 0.069). Overall, scholars perceived stress also decreased over VBRC (-2.35 points, p = 0.02). Post VBRC, scholars had high agency scores (µ = 11.02, Md = 12, range = 6-12, σ = 1.62) and cultural humility scores (µ = 22.11, Md = 23, range = 12-24, σ = 2.71). No notable race/ethnic differences were found in any measures. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our innovative approach to data science training for BIPOC in unprecedented times shows promise for better preparing the workforce critically needed to address the fundamental gaps in knowledge at the intersection of public health, structural racism, and biomedical sciences.

James S. Jackson and the program for research on Black Americans: Contributions to psychology and the social sciences.

James S. Jackson (1944-2020) is remembered as a groundbreaking social psychologist whose career contributions in scholarship, research, and service were fundamental to the field of psychology. This article briefly outlines his career-long work and contributions. A strong believer in interdisciplinary work, his research spanned other related social science disciplines (e.g., sociology, political science), as well as health and social welfare professions (public health, social work, medicine). As the founding director of the Program for Research on Black Americans at the Institute for Social Research, James Jackson initiated and led a long-standing program with a dual focus on research and training and mentoring doctoral students, postdoctoral scholars, and early career scientists. Jackson's efforts in the development of several nationally representative surveys of the Black population in the United States (e.g., National Survey of Black Americans, National Survey of American Life) revolutionized research focusing on the lives of Black Americans. James Jackson's international influence and reputation included numerous prestigious positions within national science organizations and honors and awards for his scientific contributions. Among James S. Jackson's most enduring legacies is the vast network of current scientists, researchers, and academics who were trained under his direction and leadership. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Gender Disparities in Academic Outcomes Among Graduates of a Canadian MD-PhD Program.

PURPOSE: Women have traditionally been underrepresented in MD and MD-PhD training programs. Here, we describe the changing demographics of an MD-PhD Program over three distinct time intervals. METHODS: We designed a 64-question survey and sent it to 47 graduates of the McGill University MD-PhD program in Montréal, Québec, Canada, since its inception in 1985. We also sent a 23-question survey to the 24 students of the program in 2021. The surveys included questions related to demographics, physician-scientist training, research metrics, as well as academic and personal considerations. RESULTS: We collected responses from August 2020 to August 2021 and grouped them into three intervals based on respondent graduation year: 1995-2005 (n = 17), 2006-2020 (n = 23) and current students (n = 24). Total response rate was 90.1% (n = 64/71). We found that there are more women currently in the program compared to the 1995-2005 cohort (41.7% increase, p<0.01). In addition, women self-reported as physician-scientists less frequently than men and reported less protected research time. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, recent MD-PhD alumni represent a more diverse population compared with their earlier counterparts. Identifying barriers to training remains an important step in ensuring MD-PhD trainees become successful physician-scientists.

The National Conference on Health Disparities Student Research Forum.

The annual National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) was launched in 2000. It unites health professionals, researchers, community leaders, and government officials, and is a catalyzing force in developing policies, research interventions, and programs that address prevention, social determinants, health disparities, and health equity. The NCHD Student Research Forum (SRF) was established in 2011 at the Medical University of South Carolina to build high-quality biomedical research presentation capacity in primarily underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional students. This paper describes the unique research training and professional development aspects of the NCHD SRF. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and professional development workshops on finding a mentor and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with mentors. Between 2011 and 2018, 400 undergraduate and graduate/professional students participated in the NCHD SRF. Most students were women (80.5%). Approximately half were African American or black (52.3%), 18.0% were white, and 21.3% were of Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. The NCHD SRF is unique in several ways. First, it provides detailed instructions on developing a scientific abstract, including content area examples. Second, it establishes a mandatory pre-conference training webinar demonstrating how to prepare a scientific poster. Third, it works with the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans to help identify potential sources of travel funding for students with accepted abstracts. These features make the NCHD SRF different from many other conferences focused on students' scientific presentations.

Facilitating Success of the Early Stage Surgeon Scientist Trainee: Growing the Surgeon Scientist Pipeline.

OBJECTIVE: Surgeon scientists bring to bear highly specialized talent and innovative and impactful solutions for complicated clinical problems. Our objective is to inform and provide framework for early stage surgeon scientist training and support. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Undergraduate, medical student, and residency experiences impact the career trajectory of surgeon scientists. To combat the attrition of the surgeon scientist pipeline, interventions are needed to engage trainees and to increase the likelihood of success of future surgeon scientists. METHODS: A surgery resident writing group at an academic medical center, with guidance from faculty, prepared this guidance document for early stage surgeon scientist trainees with integration of the published literature to provide context. The publicly available National Institutes of Health RePORTER tool was queried to provide data salient to early stage surgeon scientist training. RESULTS: The educational path of surgeons and the potential research career entry points are outlined. Challenges and critical supportive elements needed to inspire and sustain progress along the surgeon scientist training path are detailed. Funding mechanisms available to support formal scientific training of early stage surgeon scientists are identified and obstacles specific to surgical careers are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: This guidance enhances awareness of essential education, communication, infrastructure, resources, and advocacy by surgery leaders and other stakeholders to promote quality research training in residency and to re-invigorate the surgeon scientist pipeline.

Downstream funding success of early career researchers for resubmitted versus new applications: A matched cohort.

BACKGROUND: Early career researchers face a hypercompetitive funding environment. To help identify effective intervention strategies for early career researchers, we examined whether first-time NIH R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful at obtaining any R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than original, unfunded applicants who submitted new NIH applications, and we examined whether underrepresented minority (URM) applicants differentially benefited from resubmission. Our observational study is consistent with an NIH working group's recommendations to develop interventions to encourage resubmission. METHODS AND FINDINGS: First-time applicants with US medical school academic faculty appointments who submitted an unfunded R01 application between 2000-2014 yielded 4,789 discussed and 7,019 not discussed applications. We then created comparable groups of first-time R01 applicants (resubmitted original R01 application or submitted new NIH applications) using optimal full matching that included applicant and application characteristics. Primary and subgroup analyses used generalized mixed models with obtaining any NIH R01 funding within 3 and 5 years as the two outcomes. A gamma sensitivity analysis was performed. URM applicants represented 11% and 12% of discussed and not discussed applications, respectively. First-time R01 applicants resubmitting their original, unfunded R01 application were more successful obtaining R01 funding within 3 and 5 years than applicants submitting new applications-for both discussed and not discussed applications: discussed within 3 years (OR 4.17 [95 CI 3.53, 4.93]) and 5 years (3.33 [2.82-3.92]); and not discussed within 3 years (2.81 [2.52, 3.13]) and 5 years (2.47 [2.22-2.74]). URM applicants additionally benefited within 5 years for not discussed applications. CONCLUSIONS: Encouraging early career researchers applying as faculty at a school of medicine to resubmit R01 applications is a promising potential modifiable factor and intervention strategy. First-time R01 applicants who resubmitted their original, unfunded R01 application had log-odds of obtaining downstream R01 funding within 3 and 5 years 2-4 times higher than applicants who did not resubmit their original application and submitted new NIH applications instead. Findings held for both discussed and not discussed applications.

Enhancing research and scholarly experiences based on students' awareness and perception of the research-teaching nexus: A student-centred approach.

OBJECTIVES: Research is a core competency of a modern-day doctor and evidence-based practice underpins a career in medicine. Early exposure encourages graduates to embed research in their medical career and improves graduate attributes and student experience. However, there is wide variability of research and scholarly experiences offered in medicals schools, many developed with a significant degree of pragmatism based on resources and financial and time constraints. We examined undergraduate medical students' awareness and experience of research throughout their degree to provide recommendations for implementation and improvement of research and scholarly experiences. METHOD: Focus groups were conducted with medical students at all five stages of the medical degree programme. Data was coded to facilitate qualitative analysis for identification of important themes from each stage. RESULTS: Students reported positive impacts of research on undergraduate experience, future career and society in general. Two important themes emerged from the data, the opportunity for research and timing of research experiences. Early-stage students were concerned by their lack of experience and opportunity, whereas later-stage students identified the importance of research to employability, personal development and good medical practice, but ironically suggested it should be integrated in early stages of the course due to limitations of time. CONCLUSIONS: Students provided feedback for improving research and scholarly experiences, ideally involving early exposure, a clear programme overview, with equality of access and a longitudinal approach. An emerging framework is proposed summarising the important issues identified by students and the positive impacts research experiences provide for them. These recommendations can be applied to both existing and new research programmes to provide a student-centred approach designed to augment the students' critical analysis, inspire life-long learning, enhance the student experience and inevitably train better physicians.

The medical student's guide to pathology residency, fellowships, and careers.

Recent studies have shown that relatively few MD, DO, and underrepresented in medicine (URM) students and physicians are matching into pathology residency in the United States (US). In the 2021 Main Residency Match, just 33.6% of filled pathology residency positions were taken by senior year students at US allopathic medical schools. This has been attributed to the fact that pathology is not a required rotation in most US medical schools, pathology is often taught in an integrated curriculum in the US where is does not stand out as a distinct field, and because the COVID-19 pandemic led to a suspension of in-person pathology rotations and electives. Ultimately, many US medical students fail to consider pathology as a career pathway. The objective of this article is to provide medical students with basic information, in the form of frequently asked questions (FAQs), about pathology training and career opportunities. This was accomplished by forming a team of MD and DO pathology attendings, pathology trainees, and a medical student from multiple institutions to create a pathology guide for medical students. This guide includes information about post-sophomore fellowships, 5 major pathology residency tracks, more than 20 fellowship pathways, and allopathic and osteopathic board examinations. This guide also contains photographs and descriptions of major pathology sub-specialties, including the daily and on-call duties and responsibilities of pathology residents. The exciting future of pathology is also discussed. This guide supports the agenda of the College of American Pathologists' (CAP) Pathologist Pipeline Initiative to improve student recruitment into pathology.

Potential Impact of COVID-19 Disruptions on the Next Generation of Vision Scientists.

Importance: Emerging vision scientists who have yet to be awarded their first independent funding may have their research careers disproportionately affected by early COVID-19-related disruptions. In September 2020, the Alliance for Eye and Vision Research convened a panel of 22 such scientists (nominated by their academic institutions) to communicate to the US Congress about the importance of vision research. As part of the effort, interviews were conducted with scientists about the effect of the pandemic on their research. Observations: Qualitative areas of adverse consequences from the early months of COVID-19 disruptions included striking interruptions of patient-based research, limits on other types of clinical research, loss of research time for scientists with young children (especially women), challenges with animal colonies and cell cultures, impediments to research collaborations, and loss of training time. Conclusions and Relevance: The early months during the COVID-19 pandemic increased career stress on many early-stage investigators in the vision field and delayed (and may potentially derail) their ability to attract their first independent research funding grant. As a result, federal and private granting agencies may need to take these factors into account to retain talented, early-stage vision researchers.

A Grant-Based Experiment to Train Clinical Investigators: The AACR/ASCO Methods in Clinical Cancer Research Workshop.

To address the need for clinical investigators in oncology, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) and American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) established the Methods in Clinical Cancer Research Workshop (MCCRW). The workshop's objectives were to: (i) provide training in the methods, design, and conduct of clinical trials; (ii) ensure that clinical trials met federal and international ethical guidelines; (iii) evaluate the effectiveness of the workshop; and (iv) create networking opportunities for young investigators with mentoring senior faculty. Educational methods included: (i) didactic lectures, (ii) Small Group Discussion Sessions, (iii) Protocol Development Groups, and (iv) one-on-one mentoring. Learning focused on the development of an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-ready protocol, which was submitted on the last day of the workshop. Evaluation methods included: (i) pre- and postworkshop tests, (ii) students' workshop evaluations, (iii) faculty's ratings of protocol development, (iv) students' productivity in clinical research after the workshop, and (v) an independent assessment of the workshop. From 1996 to 2014, 1,932 students from diverse backgrounds attended the workshop. There was a significant improvement in the students' level of knowledge from the pre- to the postworkshop exams (P < 0.001). Across the classes, student evaluations were very favorable. At the end of the workshop, faculty rated 92% to 100% of the students' protocols as ready for IRB submission. Intermediate and long-term follow-ups indicated that more than 92% of students were actively involved in patient-related research, and 66% had implemented five or more protocols. This NCI-sponsored MCCRW has had a major impact on the training of clinicians in their ability to design and implement clinical trials in cancer research.

Preparing historically underrepresented trainees for biomedical cancer research careers at Huntsman Cancer Institute/University of Utah Health.

Given the well-documented inequities in health care outcomes by race, ethnicity, and gender, many health career pipeline programs have focused on supporting the development of a diverse and inclusive workforce. The State of Utah, is vast, but sparsely populated outside the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. More than 96% of our nearly 85,000 square miles is designated rural (<100 people/square mile) or frontier (<7 people/square mile). The Salt Lake City area is home to the Hunsman Cancer Institute, the only NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in the region, also noted the limited diversity in the biomedical cancer research workforce. Our primary objective was to increase the number of underrepresented trainees who pursue higher education with the goal of a career in cancer research. PathMaker is a regional, competitive pipeline program that nurtures high school or undergraduate trainees from historically underrepresented backgrounds towards a career in cancer research. Our faculty and staff team collaboratively developed a cohort model curriculum that increased student awareness of research career options; provided academic and professional development, cultural and social support, evolutionary success strategies, active mentorship, and leadership skill development; and fostered an environment of continuous evaluation and improvement. Since pilot program initiation in May 2016, the PathMaker Research Program (PathMaker) has engaged a total of 44 underrepresented trainees in cancer research labs at Huntsman Cancer Institute, the majority still in college. Eleven trainees graduated college: five employed in STEM, one pursuing a PhD in STEM; two in medical school, and three are lost to follow-up. Alumni report high levels of satisfaction with PathMaker and will be followed and supported for academic success. PathMaker is a replicable model to increase diversity and inclusion in the biomedical cancer research workforce.

Post-residency medical education fellowships: a scoping review.

The authors conducted a scoping review to investigate the structure, content, and potential impact of post-residency medical education fellowships. The authors searched eight databases to identify English-language articles describing longitudinal, post-residency medical fellowships that both focused on medical education and described the structure and content of the curriculum. The authors summarized the findings of each article and, for those articles that included a program evaluation, assessed the potential impact of the program via the Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation Model and the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument. Nine articles, describing a total of ten post-residency medical education fellowships, met inclusion criteria. Half of the programs were dedicated medical education fellowships and half were medical education tracks within a subspecialty fellowship. The content and educational strategies varied, with no two programs having the same curriculum. Most programs most focused on teaching skills, adult learning theory, curricular development, and medical education research/scholarship. Most programs used project-based learning, workshops, and faculty mentorship as educational strategies. Six of the articles included an evaluation of their program(s), all of which suggested positive changes, at least at the level of fellow behavior (Kirkpatrick level 3), and designs limited the strength of any conclusions drawn. This scoping review highlights the variation among medical education fellowships and the need for common curricular components, as well as program evaluation, across and within these fellowships. Additional assessment at higher levels of trainee outcomes will help guide the creation and revision of medical education fellowships, and inform the development of a core curriculum shared across programs. Such a core curriculum could then serve as the foundation for a certification program, by which a medical educator's expertise could be recognized, thus elevating medical education to the stature it deserves within the academic mission.

Clinical Pharmacology Worldwide: A Global Health Perspective.

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have the highest rates of mortality and morbidity globally, but lag behind high-income countries in the number of clinical trials and trained researchers, as well as research data pertaining to their populations. Lack of local clinical pharmacology and pharmacometrics expertise, limited training opportunities, and lack of local genomic data may contribute to health inequalities and limit the application of precision medicine. Continuing to develop health care infrastructure, including well-designed clinical pharmacology training and data collection in LMICs, can help address these challenges. International collaboration aimed at improving training and infrastructure and encouraging locally driven research and clinical trials will be of benefit. This review describes several examples where clinical pharmacology expertise could be leveraged, including opportunities for pharmacogenomic expertise that could drive improved recommendations for clinical guidelines. Also described are clinical pharmacology and pharmacometrics training programs in Africa, and the personal experience of a Tanzanian researcher currently on a training sabbatical in the United States, as illustrative examples of how training in clinical pharmacology can be effectively implemented in LMICs. These training efforts will benefit from advocacy for employment opportunities and career development pathways for clinical pharmacologists that are gradually being recognized and developed in LMICs. Clinical pharmacologists have a key role to play in global health, and development of training and research infrastructure to advance this expertise in LMICs will be of tremendous benefit.

Impact of Medical Student Research Fellowships on Otolaryngology Match Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: While many students participate in research years or fellowships prior to entering the otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) match, the effects of these fellowships on match outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the impact of research fellowships on odds of matching into OHNS. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: Applications from first-time, US allopathic seniors between the 2014-2015 and the 2019-2020 application cycles were reviewed. Data were abstracted from Electronic Residency Application Service applications and match results determined using the National Residency Matching Program database and online public sources. The relationship between research fellowships and matching was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 1775 applicants included, nearly 16% (n = 275) participated in research fellowships and 84.1% matched (n = 1492). Research fellows were no more likely to match into OHNS than non-research fellows (86.9% vs. 83.5%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.31, P = .161), even when adjusting for applicant characteristics (predicted probability [PP]: 88.8% vs. 85.8%, adjusted OR 1.31, P = .210). For applicants from top 25 medical schools, however, research fellowships were associated with higher odds of matching (PP: 96.5% vs. 90.0%, adjusted OR 3.07, P = .017). In addition, completing a fellowship was associated with significantly greater odds of matching into a top 25 OHNS residency program (PP: 58.6% vs. 30.5%, adjusted OR 3.24, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Fellowships may be beneficial for select applicants, though for most, they are not associated with improved odds of matching. These findings provide context for OHNS residency candidates considering research fellowships and should be carefully weighed against other potential advantages and disadvantages of fellowships. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:E2506-E2512, 2021.