Determination of gas flux of growing steers under intensive grazing conditions.

Ruminants produce one-third of the anthropogenic methane (CH 4 ) emissions worldwide, and 47% of the CH4 emissions result from ruminants under grazing conditions. However, there is limited information regarding the appropriate number of visits to accurately determine enteric CH4 emissions using the automated head-chamber system (AHCS) from growing beef cattle under intensive grazing conditions. Data from one experiment were analyzed to determine the number of visits to assess gas flux (CH4, carbon dioxide [CO 2 ], and oxygen [O 2 ]) from Angus-crossbreed steers grazing in a pivot-irrigated improved pasture. A total of 110 steers (324 ±â€…37.3 kg initial body weight) were selected and divided into two blocks. Steers were under intensive grazing management for 84 d. Depending on forage availability, steers were rotated at 2- to 4-d intervals. Pastures were predominately composed of cool-season forages. Two different databases using the same animals (n = 16) were defined to calculate the gas flux using the first 100 visits to an AHCS with 2 or more or 3 or more minutes of visitation length. The mean gas flux was estimated as the average for increasing (forward) or decreasing (reverse) the gas flux of 5-visit intervals starting with the first or the last 5 visits and increasing or decreasing until the full 100-visit dataset was utilized, respectively. Spearman and Pearson correlations were computed between the maximum visits and each shortened visit interval. Concurrently, the residual variance and the residual variance change were determined for each interval by fitting a mixed model. The minimum number of visits was defined when correlations with the total visits were greater than 0.95, and the residual variance was stabilized. The results indicated that the minimum number of visits needed to determine CH4 production varied between 45 and 70, while CO2 production and O2 consumption varied between 45 and 50 according to the visitation length. Additionally, steers that visited the AHCS for 2 or more minutes in visit duration required a greater number of visits than those that visited for 3 or more minutes. Thus, based on the average daily visitation in this experiment (1.4 visit/d), the assessment of CH4 emissions requires 32 d, while CO2 production and O2 consumption require between 32 and 36 d using 3 or more minutes of visit length from growing steers under intensive grazing conditions.

Impact of growth implants and low-level tannin supplementation on enteric emissions and nitrogen excretion in grazing steers.

The primary objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of a growth-hormone implant (Revalor-G, Merck Animal Health., Rahway, NJ, USA) and tannin supplementation (Silvafeed BX, Silva Team, San Michele Mondovi CN, Italy) on enteric methane (CH4) emissions and estimated nitrogen (N) excretion in grazing steers. Steers (n = 20; initial body weight [IBW] = 343 ±â€…14 kg) were acclimated to use a portable automated head-chamber system (AHCS) to measure CH4 and a SmartFeed Pro automated feeder for dietary supplementation (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD, USA). After the training period, steers were randomly assigned to a 2 × 2 factorial arrangements of treatments, with 2 levels of growth-hormone implants, no-implant (NO-IMP) or implanted (IMP), and 2 levels of tannin supplementation, no tannin supplementation (NO-TAN) or tannin supplementation (TAN). This created 4 treatment groups: (1) NO-TAN and NO-IMP, (2) TAN and NO-IMP, (3) IMP and NO-TAN, and (4) TAN and IMP. Tannin was offered daily at 0.30% dry matter intake (DMI) through 0.5 kg/hd/d sweetfeed supplement (Sweetfeed Mix, AgFinity., Eaton, CO, USA) with a targeted tannin intake at 48 g/hd/d. No (P ≥ 0.05) implant × tannin interaction was detected for any dependent variable, so only the main effects of implant (NO-IMP vs. IMP) and tannin supplementation (NO-TAN vs. TAN) are discussed. Implant status did not affect (P ≥ 0.56) final body weight (FBW) or average daily gain (ADG) during the 90 d grazing period. There was no effect (P ≥ 0.15) of growth implant on CH4 production or emission intensity (EI; g CH4/kg gain). Additionally, IMP steers tended (P ≤ 0.08) to have less CH4 yield (MY; g CH4/g DMI) and higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN) than NO-IMP steers. Tannin supplementation did not impact (P ≥ 0.26) FBW or ADG. However, NO-TAN steers tended (P = 0.06) to have a greater total DMI than steers supplemented with tannin. No effect (P ≥ 0.22) of tannin supplementation was observed for CH4 production and EI. Nitrogen utilization as measured through BUN, urine N, fecal N, or fecal P was similar (P ≥ 0.12) between TAN and NO-TAN animals. The findings indicate that low-level dietary supplementation to reduce enteric emissions is difficult in grazing systems due to inconsistent animal intake and that growth implants could be used as a strategy to improve growth performance and reduce EI of steers grazing improved pasture.

Individual and Institutional Factors Contribute to Research Capacity Building for Early-Stage Investigators from Groups Underrepresented in Biomedical Research: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhancement of diversity within the U.S. research workforce is a recognized need and priority at a national level. Existing comprehensive programs, such as the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI), have the dual focus of building institutional research capacity and promoting investigator self-efficacy through mentoring and training. METHODS: A qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the combination of factors that explain the success and failure to submit a grant proposal by investigators underrepresented in biomedical research from the RCMI and non-RCMI institutions. The records of 211 participants enrolled in the NRMN Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) program were reviewed, and data for 79 early-stage, underrepresented faculty investigators from RCMI (n = 23) and non-RCMI (n = 56) institutions were included. RESULTS: Institutional membership (RCMI vs. non-RCMI) was used as a possible predictive factor and emerged as a contributing factor for all of the analyses. Access to local mentors was predictive of a successful grant submission for RCMI investigators, while underrepresented investigators at non-RCMI institutions who succeeded with submitting grants still lacked access to local mentors. CONCLUSION: Institutional contexts contribute to the grant writing experiences of investigators underrepresented in biomedical research.

The Role of Mock Reviewing Sessions in the National Research Mentoring Network Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators: A Randomized Controlled Study.

The National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (SETH) study evaluates the value of adding Developmental Network to Coaching in the career advancement of diverse Early-Stage Investigators (ESIs). Focused NIH-formatted Mock Reviewing Sessions (MRS) prior to the submission of grants can significantly enhance the scientific merits of an ESI's grant application. We evaluated the most prevalent design, analysis-related factors, and the likelihood of grant submissions and awards associated with going through MRS, using descriptive statistics, Chi-square, and logistic regression methods. A total of 62 out of 234 applications went through the MRS. There were 69.4% that pursued R grants, 22.6% career development (K) awards, and 8.0% other grant mechanisms. Comparing applications that underwent MRS versus those that did not (N = 172), 67.7% vs. 38.4% were submitted for funding (i.e., unadjusted difference of 29.3%; OR = 4.8, 95% CI = (2.4, 9.8), p-value < 0.0001). This indicates that, relative to those who did not undergo MRS, ESIs who did, were 4.8 times as likely to submit an application for funding. Also, ESIs in earlier cohorts (1-2) (a period that coincided with the pre COVID-19 era) as compared to those who were recruited at later cohorts (3-4) (i.e., during the peak of COVID-19 period) were 3.8 times as likely to submit grants (p-value < 0.0001). The most prevalent issues that were identified included insufficient statistical design considerations and plans (75%), conceptual framework (28.3%), specific aims (11.7%), evidence of significance (3.3%), and innovation (3.3%). MRS potentially enhances grant submissions for extramural funding and offers constructive feedback allowing for modifications that enhance the scientific merits of research grants.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Research Career Advancement of Health Equity Scholars from Diverse Backgrounds.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly taxed scientific research and seems to have exacerbated existing inequities within the research field, particularly for early-stage investigators (ESIs). This study examines the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on traditionally underrepresented ESIs enrolled in an NIH-supported study evaluating the effectiveness of developmental networks, grant writing coaching, and mentoring on research career advancement. The survey consisted of 24 closed-ended (quantitative) and 4 open-ended questions (qualitative) linked to a participant's ability to meet grant submission deadlines, research and professional development disruptions, stress level, career transition level, self-efficacy and management of scholarly tasks, and familial responsibilities. Results from 32 respondents (53%) suggest that COVID-19 adversely impacted the continuity of research (81%) and grant submissions (63%). On average, grant submissions were delayed by 6.69 months (i.e., greater than one grant cycle). We also conducted additional analyses characterizing nonresponse and found that there were no significant predictors of nonresponse, indicating a limited threat to the validity of our findings. The disruption caused by COVID-19 to the careers of ESIs from underrepresented groups in the biomedical workforce has been profound in the short term. The long-term consequences to the future success of these groups are unknown but is a worthwhile area of research and potential innovation.

Defining self-disclosure of personal cancer coping experiences in oncology social workers' helping relationships: When cancer "hits home".

PURPOSE: Oncology social workers are increasingly finding themselves diagnosed with or caring for a loved one with cancer. Self-disclosure may be useful for building a therapeutic alliance. Yet, practice-informed guidelines for psychosocial oncology providers do not exist. RESEARCH APPROACH: Twenty-three psychosocial oncology providers diagnosed with and/or providing care to someone with cancer completed semi-structured interviews eliciting attitudes and utilization regarding self-disclosure. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH: Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Using grounded theory's constant comparative method, researchers conducted open and theoretical coding. FINDINGS: Participants expressed consensus in defining, and reported a range of evolving practices regarding, self-disclosure. Recommendations for responsible self-disclosure included self-awareness, ongoing assessment, supervision, and enhanced educational programming. INTERPRETATION AND IMPLICATION: Therapeutic tools must evolve as core features of psychosocial oncology care. A flexible and context-specific framework for clinician self-disclosure related to personal experiences with cancer can guide oncology social work practice.

Randomized Controlled Study to Test the Effectiveness of Developmental Network Coaching in the Career Advancement of Diverse Early-Stage Investigators (ESIs): Implementation Challenges and Lessons Learned.

Introduction: Adding developmental networks (DN) to grant-writing coaching can significantly enhance ESIs' research careers. Herein, we present study design, ESIs' characteristics and encountered challenges/lessons learned and their resolutions when deploying/implementing (a) NCR algorithm(s), (b) recruitment/retention and (c) implementing DN intervention. Methods: Nested Cluster Randomization (NCR) design governs this study implementation. The sample size is 220 ESIs intending to submit an NIH K, R, U, and/or Minority Supplement application(s). Primary outcome: intensity/sustainability of grant submission(s)/funding(s), measured by time to/between application(s). Outcome(s) analyses modes: summaries, Kaplan Meir and Cox proportional hazard models as a function of randomization groups and other predictors of outcomes. Results: In the present study, we recruited two cohorts of ESIs (N = 85): 39% African Americans, 18% Latinx, 18% Whites, 20% Asians and 6% Hawaiian/Pacific Islander/other ethnicities; 65% are women; 73% are assistant professors, 4% are Associate Professors and 23% are instructors/scientists/post-doctoral. Participants' disciplines: 32% basic/biomedical, 36% clinical/translational and 32% social/behavioral. Proposal(s) mechanisms: 61% research grants (R series), 31% career development (K series), 7% support of competitive research (SCORE) and 1% National Science Foundation applications. NCR did produce balance in the distribution of ESIs' demographics, sex at birth, ethnicity, professional appointments, background disciplines, and mechanism of sought funding. Lessons learned/challenges: NCR implementation was methodologically challenged during implementation by added constraints (e.g., assigning coaches to the same randomization arm of their participants as well as blinding them to ESIs' randomization group). Recruitment and retention were hampered by the COVID-19 pandemic and more progressive and innovative strategies were needed to heighten the visibility and outreach of this program. DN delivery was also affected by the pandemic and monitoring of ESIs' engagement and facilitation of communications interventions were needed. Resolution of these challenges effectively reconfigured NCR algorithms, recruitment/retention plans, and DN intervention delivery. We intend to recruit an additional 135 ESIs focusing on underrepresented scholars from RCMIs, CTSAs, and other programs. COVID-19 rendered this program 100% virtual, with recruitment/retention challenges and substantial disruption of ESIs' research. We may extend the grant writing period, coaching, and Mock Study Section support.

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Consortium: A Blueprint for Inclusive Excellence.

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions, (RCMI) Program was established by Congress to address the health research and training needs of minority populations, by preparing future generations of scientists at these institutions, with a track record of producing minority scholars in medicine, science, and technology. The RCMI Consortium consists of the RCMI Specialized Centers and a Coordinating Center (CC). The RCMI-CC leverages the scientific expertise, technologies, and innovations of RCMI Centers to accelerate the delivery of solutions to address health disparities in communities that are most impacted. There is increasing recognition that the gap in representation of racial/ethnic groups and women is perpetuated by institutional cultures lacking inclusion and equity. The objective of this work is to provide a framework for inclusive excellence by developing a systematic evaluation process with common data elements that can track the inter-linked goals of workforce diversity and health equity. At its core, the RCMI Program embodies the trinity of diversity, equity, and inclusion. We propose a realist evaluation framework and a logic model that integrates the institutional context to develop common data metrics for inclusive excellence. The RCMI-CC will collaborate with NIH-funded institutions and research consortia to disseminate and scale this model.

Grant application outcomes for biomedical researchers who participated in the National Research Mentoring Network's Grant Writing Coaching Programs.

BACKGROUND: A diverse research workforce is essential for catalyzing biomedical advancements, but this workforce goal is hindered by persistent sex and racial/ethnic disparities among investigators receiving research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In response, the NIH-funded National Research Mentoring Network implemented a Grant Writing Coaching Program (GCP) to provide diverse cohorts of early-career investigators across the United States with intensive coaching throughout the proposal development process. We evaluated the GCP's national reach and short-term impact on participants' proposal submissions and funding outcomes. METHODS: The GCP was delivered as six similar but distinct models. All models began with an in-person group session, followed by a series of coaching sessions over 4 to 12 months. Participants were surveyed at 6-, 12- and 18-months after program completion to assess proposal outcomes (submissions, awards). Self-reported data were verified and supplemented by searches of public repositories of awarded grants when available. Submission and award rates were derived from counts of participants who submitted or were awarded at least one grant proposal in a category (NIH, other federal, non-federal). RESULTS: From June 2015 through March 2019, 545 investigators (67% female, 61% under-represented racial/ethnic minority, URM) from 187 different institutions participated in the GCP. Among them, 324 (59% of participants) submitted at least one grant application and 134 (41% of submitters) received funding. A total of 164 grants were awarded, the majority being from the NIH (93, 56%). Of the 74 R01 (or similar) NIH research proposals submitted by GCP participants, 16 have been funded thus far (56% to URM, 75% to women). This 22% award rate exceeded the 2016-2018 NIH success rates for new R01s. CONCLUSION: Inter- and intra-institutional grant writing coaching groups are a feasible and effective approach to supporting the grant acquisition efforts of early-career biomedical investigators, including women and those from URM groups.

Using a Virtual Community (the Health Equity Learning Collaboratory) to Support Early-Stage Investigators Pursuing Grant Funding.

Junior investigators often have limited access to networks of scientific experts and resources that facilitate competitive grant submissions. Since environments in which scientists are trained are critically important for long-term success, we built and tested a virtual environment for early-stage investigators (ESIs) working on grant proposals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the virtual community's influence on grant submission patterns among participants from underrepresented groups. As part of a grant writing coaching model, junior investigators were recruited into a professional development program designed to develop competitive grantsmanship skills. Designed by the Research Resources and Outreach Core (RROC) of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), the Health Equity Learning Collaboratory (EQ-Collaboratory) provided a virtual community for social support, accountability, constructive feedback, and access to peer networks to help investigators overcome barriers to grant submission. This study assessed differences in outcomes for participants who completed the training within the EQ-Collaboratory compared to those who did not. The analyzed data revealed a statistically significant difference in the average time to submission for participants enrolled in the EQ-Collaboratory. EQ-Collaboratory ESIs submitted proposals 148.6 days earlier, (p < 0.0001). The results suggest that a supportive virtual environment can help investigators more quickly overcome barriers to grant submission.

A new approach to mentoring for research careers: the National Research Mentoring Network.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Effective mentorship is critical to the success of early stage investigators, and has been linked to enhanced mentee productivity, self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. The mission of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) is to provide all trainees across the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences with evidence-based mentorship and professional development programming that emphasizes the benefits and challenges of diversity, inclusivity, and culture within mentoring relationships, and more broadly the research workforce. The purpose of this paper is to describe the structure and activities of NRMN. KEY HIGHLIGHTS: NRMN serves as a national training hub for mentors and mentees striving to improve their relationships by better aligning expectations, promoting professional development, maintaining effective communication, addressing equity and inclusion, assessing understanding, fostering independence, and cultivating ethical behavior. Training is offered in-person at institutions, regional training, or national meetings, as well as via synchronous and asynchronous platforms; the growing training demand is being met by a cadre of NRMN Master Facilitators. NRMN offers career stage-focused coaching models for grant writing, and other professional development programs. NRMN partners with diverse stakeholders from the NIH-sponsored Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), as well as organizations outside the DPC to work synergistically towards common diversity goals. NRMN offers a virtual portal to the Network and all NRMN program offerings for mentees and mentors across career development stages. NRMNet provides access to a wide array of mentoring experiences and resources including MyNRMN, Guided Virtual Mentorship Program, news, training calendar, videos, and workshops. National scale and sustainability are being addressed by NRMN "Coaches-in-Training" offerings for more senior researchers to implement coaching models across the nation. "Shark Tanks" provide intensive review and coaching for early career health disparities investigators, focusing on grant writing for graduate students, postdoctoral trainees, and junior faculty. IMPLICATIONS: Partners from diverse perspectives are building the national capacity and sparking the institutional changes necessary to truly diversify and transform the biomedical research workforce. NRMN works to leverage resources towards the goals of sustainability, scalability, and expanded reach.

Ethnography, fidelity, and the evidence that anthropology adds: supplementing the fidelity process in a clinical trial of supported employment.

This discussion considers the role and findings of ethnographic research within a clinical trial of supported employment for veterans with spinal cord injury. Contributing to qualitative evaluation research and to debates over anthropological evidence vis-à-vis clinical trials, we demonstrate how enactors of a randomized controlled trial can simultaneously attend to both the trial's evidentiary and procedural requirements and to the lived experiences and needs of patients and clinicians. Three major findings are described: (1) contextual information essential to fidelity efforts within the trial; (2) the role of human interrelationships and idiosyncratic networks in the trial's success; and (3) a mapping of the power and authority structures relevant to the staff's ability to perform the protocol. We emphasize strengths of anthropological ethnography in clinical trials that include the provision of complementary, qualitative data, the capture of otherwise unmeasured parts of the trial, and the realization of important information for the translation of the clinical findings into new settings.

Historical threads in the development of oncology social work.

As the Association of Oncology Social Work celebrates its 25th year, we pause to reflect on the many historical threads that contributed to its development and hear from each of the presidents who helped create the organization, as we know it today. Set within hospitals, medical social work was born in the early 20th century. In the 1940s medical social work became necessary for hospital accreditation. Two additional historical shifts, one in medical improvements in treating cancer, the other a shift to a consumer-oriented American Cancer Society, contributed to the push for a greater role for the federal government in funding cancer research. Oncology social work came to full blossom in the 1970s, a result of the physicians' need for a member of the health care team who understood cancer, its treatment, and the patient's need to address his or her psychosocial needs resulting from cancer. Today, oncology social work is a fully developed profession with a national organization providing education and support to oncology social workers' in their use of psychosocial interventions and research in behalf of cancer patients and their families.

Challenges in image-guided therapy system design.

System development for image-guided therapy (IGT), or image-guided interventions (IGI), continues to be an area of active interest across academic and industry groups. This is an emerging field that is growing rapidly: major academic institutions and medical device manufacturers have produced IGT technologies that are in routine clinical use, dozens of high-impact publications are published in well regarded journals each year, and several small companies have successfully commercialized sophisticated IGT systems. In meetings between IGT investigators over the last two years, a consensus has emerged that several key areas must be addressed collaboratively by the community to reach the next level of impact and efficiency in IGT research and development to improve patient care. These meetings culminated in a two-day workshop that brought together several academic and industrial leaders in the field today. The goals of the workshop were to identify gaps in the engineering infrastructure available to IGT researchers, develop the role of research funding agencies and the recently established US-based National Center for Image Guided Therapy (NCIGT), and ultimately to facilitate the transfer of technology among research centers that are sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Workshop discussions spanned many of the current challenges in the development and deployment of new IGT systems. Key challenges were identified in a number of areas, including: validation standards; workflows, use-cases, and application requirements; component reusability; and device interface standards. This report elaborates on these key points and proposes research challenges that are to be addressed by a joint effort between academic, industry, and NIH participants.