Extending social accountability mandates to biomedical research in Canadian faculties of medicine.

Background: Social accountability (SA), as defined by Boelen and Heck, is the obligation of medical schools to address the needs of communities through education, research and service activities. While SA is embedded within health profession education frameworks in medicine, they are rarely taught within graduate-level (MSc/PhD) education. Methods: As these programs train future medical researchers, we invited first-year graduate students enrolled in a mandatory professionalism class at our institution (n = 111) to complete a survey on their perceptions of the importance of SA in their research, training, and future careers. Results: Over 80% (n = 87) of respondents agreed that SA is relevant and felt committed to integrating it into their future research activities, only a limited number of students felt confident and/or supported in their abilities to integrate SA into their research. Conclusions: Specific SA training in graduate education is necessary for students to effectively incorporate elements of SA into their research, and as such support the SA mandates of their training institutions. We posit that awareness of SA principles formalizes the professional standards for biomedical researchers and is thus foundational for developing a professionalism curriculum in graduate education programs in medicine. We propose an expansion of the World Health Organization (WHO) partnership pentagon to include partners within the research ecosystem (funding partners, certification bodies) that collaborate with biomedical researchers to make research socially accountable.

Contexte: La responsabilité sociale (RS), telle que définie par Boelen et Heck, est l'obligation pour les facultés de médecine de répondre aux besoins des communautés par l'entremise de l'éducation, de la recherche et des activités de service. Bien que la responsabilité sociale soit intégrée dans les cadres de formation des professionnels de santé en médecine, elle est rarement enseignée au niveau des études supérieures (MSc/PhD). Méthodes: Étant donné que ces programmes forment les futurs chercheurs médicaux, nous avons invité les étudiants de première année inscrits à un cours obligatoire sur le professionnalisme dans notre établissement (n = 111) à participer à une enquête sur leurs perceptions de l'importance de la RS dans leur recherche, leur formation et leur future carrière. Résultats: Plus de 80 % (n = 87) des répondants ont reconnu la pertinence de la RS et se sont engagés à l'intégrer dans leurs futures activités de recherche, mais seul un nombre limité d'étudiants se sont sentis confiants et/ou soutenus dans leurs capacités à intégrer la RS dans leur recherche. Conclusions: Une formation propre à la RS dans le cadre des études supérieures est nécessaire pour que les étudiants puissent intégrer efficacement des éléments de la RS dans leur recherche, et ainsi promouvoir les mandats de RS de leurs établissements de formation. Nous estimons que la sensibilisation aux principes de la RS formalise les normes professionnelles des chercheurs biomédicaux et qu'elle est donc fondamentale pour l'élaboration d'un programme de professionnalisme dans les programmes d'études supérieures en médecine. Nous proposons d'élargir le pentagone du partenariat de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) pour y inclure les partenaires de l'écosystème de la recherche (partenaires financiers, organismes de certification) qui collaborent avec les chercheurs biomédicaux pour rendre la recherche socialement responsable.

Sociodemographic factors and research experience impact MD-PhD program acceptance.

The 2014 NIH Physician-Scientist Workforce Working Group predicted a future shortage of physician-scientists. Subsequent studies have highlighted disparities in MD-PhD admissions based on race, income, and education. Our analysis of data from the Association of American Medical Colleges covering 2014-2021 (15,156 applicants and 6,840 acceptees) revealed that acceptance into US MD-PhD programs correlates with research experience, family income, and research publications. The number of research experiences associated with parental education and family income. Applicants were more likely to be accepted with a family income greater than $50,000 or with one or more publications or presentations. Applicants were less likely to be accepted if they had parents without a graduate degree, were Black/African American, were first-generation college students, or were reapplicants, irrespective of the number of research experiences, publications, or presentations. These findings underscore an admissions bias that favors candidates from affluent and highly educated families, while disadvantaging underrepresented minorities.

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.

National Pediatrician-Scientist Collaborative Workgroup comment on new ACGME requirements' impact on pediatric physician-scientists.

BACKGROUND: The ACGME recently released its recommendation for updates to the program requirements for pediatrics. These updates proposed changes to allocation of resident clinical time and a greater emphasis on individualization. The potential impact of these changes on the training of physician-scientists is discussed. METHODS: Discussion of the proposed changes was held within the members of the National Pediatrician-Scientist Collaborative Workgroup, a group that represents scientists, trainees, program directors, chairs, and physician-scientist educators at nearly 30 residency programs from across the US with a focus on understanding and developing optimal approaches to physician-scientist training. Consideration was given to the both the personal and institutional impact of the proposal for physician-scientist development. RESULTS: Both threats and opportunities were identified. Key opportunities include the enhanced individualized training time that could be used to explore research. Threats include re-allocation of clinical training time that may strain institutions financially, expand clinical service requirements for other early career stage individuals, and alter exposure to a broad range of pediatric specialists and sub-specialists that impact career development. CONCLUSION: The NPSCW encourages consideration of the impact of changing program requirements on physician-scientist development to include ongoing discussion amongst mentors, programs, and trainees to understand and mitigate impact of new program requirements on the development of pediatrician-scientists.

Structural insights into the career path between pre- and postgraduate physician-scientist training programs.

The growing complexities of clinical medicine and biomedical research have clouded the career path for physician-scientists. In this perspective piece, we address one of the most opaque career stage transitions along the physician-scientist career path, the transition from medical school to research-focused internal medicine residency programs, or physician-scientist training programs (PSTPs). We present the perspectives of medical scientist training program (MSTP) and PSTP directors on critical features of PSTPs that can help trainees proactively align their clinical and scientific training for successful career development. We aim to provide both trainees and MSTP directors with a conceptual framework to better understand and navigate PSTPs. We also offer interview-specific questions to help trainees gather data and make informed decisions in choosing a residency program that best supports their career.

Educating the next generation of cancer researchers: Evaluation of a cancer research partnership training program.

African American, American Indian and Alaska Native, Hispanic (or Latinx), Native Hawaiian, and other Pacific Islander groups are underrepresented in the biomedical workforce, which is one of the barriers to addressing cancer disparities among minority populations. The creation of a more inclusive biomedical workforce dedicated to reducing the burden of cancer health disparities requires structured, mentored research and cancer-related research exposure during the earlier stages of training. The Summer Cancer Research Institute (SCRI) is a multicomponent 8-week intensive summer program funded under the Partnership between a Minority Serving Institute and a National Institutes of Health-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. In this survey study, we found that students who participated in the SCRI Program reported greater knowledge and interest in pursuing careers in cancer-related fields than their counterparts who did not participate in SCRI. Successes, challenges, and solutions in providing training in cancer and cancer health disparities research to improve diversity in the biomedical fields were also discussed.

Novel Collaborations Across Training Programs to Support Mentoring in Sex Differences Research.

There is a critical need to develop a capable and well-trained workforce dedicated to the systematic study of sex differences and examination of sex as a biological variable. Through the support of the Office of Research on Women's Health and partner National Institute of Health centers, the Specialized Centers of Research Excellence (SCORE) on Sex Differences Career Enhancement Cores (CECs) were established to help address this need. We describe the integration of the Medical University of South Carolina SCORE CEC with other National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded and institutional training programs to promote training synergies, share resources, and enhance mentorship opportunities. Benefits of developing an intrainstitutional training platform have included facilitating cross-disciplinary interactions, encouragement of peer mentorship, and reduced burden on training program leadership.

An Innovative Workshop Embedding Pathology Service Users into the Undergraduate Biomedical Science Curriculum.

The integration of pathology service users into the biomedical science curriculum has been driven by the refinement of the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) Standards of Proficiency. This study aimed to design and implement a novel and innovative service user event with a reflective assessment to enhance students' knowledge and understanding of the impact of pathology laboratory results on the patient pathway. The 4-h workshop consisted of a series of service users. Patients discussed how pathology services had contributed to their diagnosis and treatment, while service providers-a Microbiology Consultant, a director of primary care, and the patient referral optimisation officer-discussed their roles and their interactions with pathology services. Post-event, students completed a 750-word reflective assessment, highlighting challenges experienced by service users and providing suggestions for improving the delivery of pathology services. In total, 57.5% of respondents (57/99) completed a post-reflection survey, which included open- and closed-ended questions. Quantitative analysis of the survey data revealed that over 87.7% of respondents had increased knowledge and understanding of the revised HCPC standards. Following the assessment, students reported a significant increase in their confidence with respect to reflective writing (p < 0.001), with over 90% of respondents agreeing that the reflective assessment had increased their knowledge and understanding of the limitations that may negatively impact service users and patient care. Moreover, respondents highlighted how advancements in point-of-care testing (POCT) and improvements in communication can improve patient experiences. Thematic analysis revealed that respondents agreed that embedding patients into the curriculum reinforced the importance of there being a patient behind every sample. Respondents reported that reflecting upon service user experiences enabled them to identify improvements to the delivery of pathology services while recognising the essential role that Biomedical Scientists play in the patient pathway. This successful workshop has created a platform encompassing a range of pathology service users in the undergraduate curriculum. We recommend that other accredited biomedical science programmes adopt and embed this innovative workshop and reflective assessment into their programmes to help them meet these standards relating to service users while fostering important transferable skills in their students.

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).

The impact of underrepresented minority or marginalized identity status on training outcomes of MD-PhD students.

Dual-degree MD-PhD programs have historically lacked diversity of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and other facets of identity. Like MD- and PhD-granting programs, MD-PhD program training environments are also marked by structural barriers that negatively impact measurable academic outcomes of underrepresented and/or marginalized students in academic medicine (racial and ethnic minority groups considered underrepresented by the National Institute of Health, sexual and gender minorities, individuals with disabilities, and individuals of low socioeconomic status). In this article, we review the existing literature on MD-PhD program disparities affecting students from these groups and provide recommendations grounded on the reviewed evidence. Our literature review identified four generalizable barriers that can impact the training outcomes of students from these marginalized and/or underrepresented groups: 1) discrimination and bias, 2) impostor syndrome and stereotype threat, 3) lack of identity-similar mentors, and 4) suboptimal institutional policies and procedures. We propose goal-oriented interventions that may begin to ameliorate the disparities present in MD-PhD program training environments that affect students from marginalized and/or underrepresented groups in academic medicine.

A mentored hands-on training model for scaling up implementation and intervention research in India: "connecting the dots".

Despite the high burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), less than 25% of those in need have access to appropriate services, in part due to a scarcity of locally relevant, evidence-based interventions and models of care. To address this gap, researchers from India and the United States and the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) collaboratively developed a "Grantathon" model to provide mentored research training to 24 new principal investigators (PIs). This included a week-long didactic training, a customized web-based data entry/analysis system and a National Coordination Unit (NCU) to support PIs and track process objectives. Outcome objectives were assessed via scholarly output including publications, awards received and subsequent grants that were leveraged. Multiple mentorship strategies including collaborative problem-solving approaches were used to foster single-centre and multicentre research. Flexible, approachable and engaged support from mentors helped PIs overcome research barriers, and the NCU addressed local policy and day-to-day challenges through informal monthly review meetings. Bi-annual formal review presentations by all PIs continued through the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling interim results reporting and scientific review, also serving to reinforce accountability. To date, more than 33 publications, 47 scientific presentations, 12 awards, two measurement tools, five intervention manuals and eight research grants have been generated in an open-access environment. The Grantathon is a successful model for building research capacity and improving mental health research in India that could be adopted for use in other LMICs.

Preserving the Pipeline of Surgeon Scientists: The Role of a Structured Research Curriculum.

INTRODUCTION: With shrinking National Institute of Health support, increased clinical demands, and less time for research training during residency, the future of surgeon scientists is in jeopardy. We evaluate the role of a structured research curriculum and its association with resident academic productivity. METHODS: Categorical general surgery residents who matched between 2005 and 2019 at our institution were analyzed (n = 104). An optional structured research curriculum, including a mentor program, grant application support, didactic seminars, and travel funding was implemented in 2016. Academic productivity, including the number of publications and citations, was compared between residents who started in or after 2016 (postimplementation, n = 33) and those before 2016 (preimplementation, n = 71). Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, multivariable logistic regression, and inverse probability treatment weighting were performed. RESULTS: The postimplementation group had more female (57.6% versus 31.0%, P = 0.010), and nonwhite (36.4% versus 5.6%, P < 0.001) residents and had more publications and citations at the start of residency (P < 0.001). Postimplementation residents were more likely to choose academic development time (ADT) (66.7% versus 23.9%, P < 0.001) and had higher median (IQR) number of publications (2.0 (1.0-12.5) versus 1.0 (0-5.0), P = 0.028) during residency. After adjusting the number of publications at the start of residency, multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the postimplementation group was five times more likely to choose ADT (95% CI 1.7-14.7, P = 0.04). Further, inverse probability treatment weighting revealed an increase of 0.34 publications per year after implementing the structured research curriculum among residents who chose ADT (95% CI 0.1-0.9, P = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: A structured research curriculum was associated with increased academic productivity and surgical resident participation in dedicated ADT. A structured research curriculum is effective and should be integrated into residency training to support the next generation of academic surgeons.

Survey analysis and discussion on cultivating scientific research quality among undergraduates in medical colleges.

To explore rational measures to improve medical undergraduates' scientific research quality by investigating and analyzing their scientific research situation. A questionnaire survey was conducted in March 2022 among medical college/university undergraduates across four grades and five majors. Five hundred and ninety-four questionnaires were distributed, and 553 valid copies were returned, with a 93.1% return rate. The results showed that 61.5% of the students had an intense interest in research experiments, and 46.8% thought it was important for undergraduates to participate in research experiments, but only 17.5% often participated in them. Among the students, 85.0% thought that the main factors preventing them from participating in research experiments were academic stress and insufficient time, and 82.6% hoped that mentors would focus on practical skills training; only 13.0% read literature at least once per week, and 93.5% were not proficient at organizing and using literature. Among the participating undergraduates, more than half were strongly interested in scientific research, but academic stress, unclear participation modes, and insufficient literature retrieval skills limited undergraduate scientific research practice and improvement of scientific quality. Therefore, it is essential to cultivate undergraduates' interest in scientific research, ensure that they have spare time to engage in scientific research, improve the undergraduate scientific research mentorship system, and enhance relevant scientific research abilities to cultivate more innovative talent in scientific research.

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.

LMIC Research Centers' Experiences Hosting U.S. and LMIC Trainees: Evaluation of the Fogarty Global Health Fellows and Scholars Program, 2012 to 2020.

In this mixed-methods study, we explore themes that emerged from a survey assessing the programmatic experiences of mentors and administrators at institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) hosting trainees supported by the Fogarty International Center's Global Health Program for Fellows and Scholars. A total of 89 of 170 potential respondents representing 31 countries completed the survey (response rate, 52.4%). There was agreement among respondents that their institutions received sufficient funds to support trainees and had the capacity to manage operational and financial aspects of the program. A majority also agreed that both LMIC and U.S. trainees were beneficial to the host institutions, and that trainee projects were relevant to the needs of the host country. Respondents felt that program benefits to LMIC trainees could be improved by increasing the research consumables budget, increasing the flexibility of program timelines, and increasing engagement between LMIC and U.S. trainees and institutions. Respondents indicated that both U.S. and LMIC trainees behaved professionally (including demonstrating respectful and ethical behavior) and took appropriate initiative to conduct their research projects. Findings from this study will help inform innovations to similar training initiatives that will enhance sustainability and improve program performance, and will be responsive to local needs.

A Student-Centered, Entrepreneurship Development (ASCEND) Undergraduate Summer Research Program: Foundational Training for Health Research.

Increasing the participation of students of African descent and other minoritized populations in the scientific workforce is imperative in generating a more equitable biomedical research infrastructure and increasing national research creativity and productivity. Undergraduate research training programs have shown to be essential tools in retaining underrepresented minority (URM) students in the sciences and attracting them into STEM and biomedical careers. This paper describes an innovative approach to harness students' entrepreneurial desire for autonomy and creativity in a Summer Research Institute (SRI) that has served as an entry point into a multiyear, National Institutes of Health Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (NIH BUILD)-funded research training program. The SRI was designed as an 8-week, student-centered and course-based research model in which students select their own research topics. We test here the effects of SRI training on students' science self-efficacy and science identity, along with several other constructs often associated with academic outcomes in the sciences. The data shown here comprise analysis of four different training cohorts throughout four subsequent summers. We show significant gains in students' science self-efficacy and science identity at the conclusion of SRI training, as well as academic adjustment and sense of belonging. SRI participants also displayed substantially improved retention in their science majors and graduation rates.

The Danish-American Research Exchange (DARE): a cross-sectional study of a binational research education program.

BACKGROUND: Most medical educational programs emphasize clinical observation or clinical skill acquisition, fewer focus upon research. The Danish-American Research Exchange (DARE) program, sponsored by the Lundbeck Foundation, is unique in that the medical student initiates biomedical research collaboration between Danish and US medical institutions. To achieve this, Danish medical students (DARE students) conduct binational mentored research projects while based in the United States for 10 months. In addition, DARE students are introduced to interdisciplinary thinking about how to develop ultra-low-cost healthcare interventions through the '$10 Challenge'. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of DARE alumni over five consecutive years (2015-2020, n = 24). Research metrics included completion of a research project, primary authorship, and co-authorship of publications. The number of publications, prior to and after the DARE program were enumerated. For the first four cohorts, graduation from medical school and acceptance or intention to enter a joint MD-PhD program also were assessed. Two focus groups were conducted using constructivist grounded theory. Discussions were transcribed, redacted, and coded using Dedoose software. RESULTS: DARE Medical students were 31.2 years (range 24-35), the majority were women (67%;16/24). The majority (17/24;71%) completed a first author publication in a peer-reviewed journal with a median of 3.9 per DARE alumnus. DARE alumnus reported increased proficiency in biostatistics, epidemiology, coding and public speaking as well as stronger research qualities in creativity, critical thinking, comfort in approaching scientist in both the US and Denmark (p < 0.001 for all). Qualitative key themes included: increased confidence, a deepening of research inquiry and linkage to a research network. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminarily, this study suggests that medical students can initiate binational collaboration in medicine. Benefits include research productivity, intention to pursue academic medical careers, as well as positive impacts on motivation. This medical student-initiated research model lays the groundwork for using this model across other country pairs to promote binational collaboration.

Predictors of academic career progression among early career physician-scientists via an intensive research training program abroad: a case study.

BACKGROUND: Despite extensive efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist pipeline, attrition has been observed along the physician-scientist developmental pathway. Research exposure during clinical training is considered an important factor favoring the decision to pursue an academic career pathway. METHODS: The authors sought to identify factors associated with academic career progression among junior physician-scientists following the completion of an intensive research training program, using the framework of the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), to benefit the design of efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist career pipeline. We conducted a retrospective study of 108 physicians who completed a long-term research training program abroad during residency, or within a few years post-residency completion, between 2010 and 2017. With potential predictors of academic career progression prioritized by SCCT, multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of sustained research involvement, high productivity and high research competency after training, respectively. The SCCT was used to illuminate our findings. RESULTS: Co-publications with training supervisors abroad and medical oncology/pediatric oncology as a clinical specialty were positively associated with sustained research involvement and high productivity. Joining the training program after the age of 36 was negatively associated with high research competency. All of the predictors shared a common feature of high correlation with both self-efficacy and environmental elements, the reciprocal interactions of which may affect the career progression of physician-scientists. CONCLUSIONS: Insights gained through this analysis provide policy recommendations for the designing of efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist career pipeline. Priorities should be given to institutional oversight to ensure strengthened self-efficacy at the beginning of one's academic career, by providing long-term research training opportunities to young residents and promoting co-publications with their training supervisors during the training. In order to avoid the negative impact to self-efficacy caused by patient-related burnout or academic isolation, academic medical centers should take measures to guarantee protected research time, and to develop a positive culture encouraging mentoring relationships between junior and experienced physician-scientists in medical departments.

Lessons learned: from mentored to mentor.

This Viewpoint was written in association with the 25th anniversary of the American Society for Clinical Investigation's (ASCI's) Stanley J. Korsmeyer Award, which honors the highest standards of scientific excellence, meritorious research, intellectual integrity, and the mentoring of future life-science researchers. In 2018, the award recognized Joseph Heitman (Figure 1), for his key contributions to our understanding of how eukaryotic microbial pathogens evolve, cause disease, and develop drug resistance and his discovery of TOR and FKBP12 as targets of the immunosuppressive chemotherapeutic drug rapamycin. Dr. Heitman has mentored numerous undergraduates, medical students, graduate students, and postdoctoral and medical fellows, many of whom have developed independent careers in medicine and basic biomedical research.