Maximizing scarce colonoscopy resources: the crucial role of stool-based tests.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems, including federally qualified health centers, experienced disruptions in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. National organizations called for greater use of at-home stool-based testing followed by colonoscopy for those with abnormal test results to limit (in-person) colonoscopy exams to people with acute symptoms or who were high risk. This stool-test-first strategy may also be useful for adults with low-risk adenomas who are due for surveillance colonoscopy. We argue that colonoscopy is overused as a first-line screening method in low- and average-risk adults and as a surveillance tool among adults with small adenomas. Yet, simultaneously, many people do not receive much-needed colonoscopies. Delivering the right screening tests at intervals that reduce the risk of CRC, while minimizing patient inconvenience and procedural risks, can strengthen health-care systems. Risk stratification could improve efficiency of CRC screening, but because models that adequately predict risk are years away from clinical use, we need to optimize use of currently available technology-that is, low-cost fecal testing followed by colonoscopy for those with abnormal test results. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgent need to adapt to resource constraints around colonoscopies and showed that increased use of stool-based testing was possible. Learning how to adapt to such constraints without sacrificing patients' health, particularly for patients who receive care at federally qualified health centers, should be a priority for CRC prevention research.

Contributions Made by Undergraduates to Research Projects: Using the CREDIT Taxonomy to Assess Undergraduate Research Experiences.

The authors developed a novel tool, the CREDIT URE, to define and measure roles performed by undergraduate students working in research placements. Derived from an open-source taxonomy for determining authorship credit, the CREDIT URE defines 14 possible roles, allowing students and their research mentors to rate the degree to which students participate in each role. The tool was administered longitudinally across three cohorts of undergraduate student-mentor pairs involved in a biomedical research training program for students from diverse backgrounds. Students engaged most frequently in roles involving data curation, investigation, and writing. Less frequently, students engaged in roles related to software development, supervision, and funding acquisition. Students' roles changed over time as they gained experience. Agreement between students and mentors about responsibility for roles was high.

Enhancing Institutional Research Capacity: Results and Lessons from a Pilot Project Program.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) established the Building University Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) initiative to increase engagement and retention of undergraduates from diverse backgrounds in biomedical research. Portland State University, in partnership with ten other academic institutions, received a BUILD award and developed the BUILD EXITO (Enhancing Cross-Disciplinary Infrastructure and Training at Oregon) project. The EXITO program offers a three-year research and mentorship experience for undergraduates in biomedical, behavioral, social science, clinical, and bioengineering disciplines. The BUILD initiative also emphasizes enhancing research capacity and infrastructure through institutional change and faculty development. A key piece of EXITO's program to enhance research capacity is offering faculty an opportunity to apply for up to $50,000 of funding to carry out a one-year pilot study. We conducted two separate RFAs for this purpose, closely modeled on NIH's Small Grant Program (R03), over two years. Principal Investigators of pilot projects were encouraged to include EXITO students, or other undergraduate students, on their research teams. Students then worked on these research projects as part of EXITO's intensive mentored research program. This paper reports on methods to conduct and implement a pilot project program intended to train primarily junior faculty members to write and submit an NIH proposal and fund successful applicants to gather pilot project data to aid in applying for future proposals. We provided a step-by-step rigorous submission and review process. We provided proposal writing and revising workshops, technical support, and helped pilot project Principal Investigators (PIs) with biosketches, IRB applications, IUCUC documents, budgets, and other proposal sections. We secured at least three external (not at any BUILD EXITO institution) reviewers for each proposal. PIs revised proposals before resubmitting and receiving their final scores. Across two RFAs, we provided funds twenty PIs to conduct pilot projects; these projects included at least 21 students working on them who received mentoring in research methods and in disseminating results. This paper describes important lessons learned, including the importance of: allotting sufficient time to recruit reviewers; recruiting reviewers through a variety of sources and methods; and assisting PIs in engaging with research administration staff at Portland State University and partner institutions. Challenges included: finding an optimal timeline that was neither too compressed nor too stretched out; encouraging applicants from distant partner institutions to apply and keeping them engaged and retained through the entire process; and assisting PIs from partner institutions to efficiently utilize Portland State University's sponsored projects department if similar resources were not available at their home institutions. Our goal is to provide guidance and insights to faculty and research-administration staff at other institutions interested in replicating or adapting EXITO's program to enhance institutional research capacity.