scholarly journals Cross-Center Virtual Education Fellowship Program for Early-Career Researchers in Atrial Fibrillation

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tinuola B. Ajayi ◽  
Christy D. Remein ◽  
Randall S. Stafford ◽  
Angela Fagerlin ◽  
Mina K. Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Population Health ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Pedagogical Model ◽  
Grant Applications

Background: It is estimated that over 46 million individuals have atrial fibrillation (AF) worldwide, and the incidence and prevalence of AF are increasing globally. There is an urgent need to accelerate the academic development of scientists possessing the skills to conduct innovative, collaborative AF research. Methods: We designed and implemented a virtual AF Strategically Focused Research Network Cross-Center Fellowship program to enhance the competencies of early-stage AF basic, clinical, and population health researchers through experiential education and mentorship. The pedagogical model involves significant cross-center collaboration to produce a curriculum focused on enhancing AF scientific competencies, fostering career/professional development, and cultivating grant writing skills. Outcomes for success involve clear expectations for fellows to produce manuscripts, presentations, and—for those at the appropriate career stage–grant applications. We evaluated the effectiveness of the fellowship model via mixed methods formative and summative surveys. Results: In 2 years of the fellowship, fellows generally achieved the productivity metrics sought by our pedagogical model, with outcomes for the 12 fellows including 50 AF-related manuscripts, 7 publications, 28 presentations, and 3 grant awards applications. Participant evaluations reported that the fellowship effectively met its educational objectives. All fellows reported medium to high satisfaction with the overall fellowship, webinar content and facilitation, staff communication and support, and program organization. Conclusions: The fellowship model represents an innovative educational strategy by providing a virtual AF training and mentoring curriculum for early-career basic, clinical, and population health scientists working across multiple institutions, which is particularly valuable in the pandemic era.

scholarly journals Gender and language use in scientific grant writing

FACETS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 442-458
Author(s):  
Mackenzie Urquhart-Cronish ◽  
Sarah P. Otto
Keyword(s):  
Language Use ◽  
Rejection Rate ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Women In Science ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Engineering Research ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Language Variables

Women in science, technology, engineering, and math are not equally represented across tenure-track career stages, and this extends to grant funding, where women applicants often have lower success rates compared with men. While gender bias in reviewers has been documented, it is currently unknown whether written language in grant applications varies predictably with gender to elicit bias against women. Here we analyse the text of ∼2000 public research summaries from the 2016 Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) individual Discovery Grant (DG) program. We explore the relationship between language variables, inferred gender and career stage, and funding levels. We also analyse aggregated data from the 2012–2018 NSERC DG competitions to determine whether gender impacted the probability of receiving a grant for early-career researchers. We document a marginally significant gender difference in funding levels for successful grants, with women receiving $1756 less than men, and a large and significant difference in rejection rates among early-career applicants (women: 40.4% rejection; men: 33.0% rejection rate). Language variables had little ability to predict gender or funding level using predictive modelling. Our results indicate that NSERC funding levels and success rates differ between men and women, but we find no evidence that gendered language use affected funding outcomes.

scholarly journals Mentoring Experiences and Publication Productivity among Early Career Biomedical Investigators and Trainees

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-282
Author(s):  
Angela Gutierrez ◽  
Lourdes R. Guerrero ◽  
Heather E. McCreath ◽  
Steven P. Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Early Career ◽  
Social Characteristics ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
Publication Productivity ◽  
Underrepresented Minority ◽  
Diverse Workforce ◽  
Annual Survey ◽  
Research Mentoring

Objective: To identify which mentoring domains influence publication productivity among early career researchers and trainees and whether publication productivity differs between underrepresented minority (URM) and well-represented groups (WRGs). The mentoring aspects that promote publica­tion productivity remain unclear. Advancing health equity requires a diverse workforce, yet URM trainees are less likely to publish and URM investigators are less likely to ob­tain federal research grants, relative to WRG counterparts.Participants: Early career biomedical investigators and trainees from the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), N=115.Methods: A mentoring-focused online follow-up survey was administered to respondents of the NRMN Annual Survey who self-identified as mentees. Publications were identified from a public database and validated with participant CV data. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested the as­sociations of publication productivity with mentoring domains.Results: URM investigators and trainees had fewer publications (M = 7.3) than their WRG counterparts (M = 13.8). Controlling for career stage and social characteristics, those who worked on funded projects, and received grant-writing or research mentorship, had a higher probability of any publications. Controlling for URM status, gender, and career stage, mentorship on grant-writing and funding was positively as­sociated with publication count (IRR=1.72). Holding career stage, gender, and mentor­ing experiences constant, WRG investigators and trainees had more publications than their URM counterparts (IRR=1.66).Conclusions: Grant-writing mentorship is particularly important for publica­tion productivity. Future research should investigate whether grant-writing mentor­ship differentially impacts URM and WRG investigators and should investigate how and why grant-writing mentorship fosters increased publication productivity. Ethn Dis. 2021;31(2):273-282; doi:10.18865/ed.31.2.273

scholarly journals Assessing and piloting interoperability for population health research

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Estupiñán-Romero ◽  
J Gonzalez-García ◽  
E Bernal-Delgado
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Population Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Network Architecture ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Health Data ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Technical Solution ◽  
Privacy And Security

Abstract Issue/problem Interoperability is paramount when reusing health data from multiple data sources and becomes vital when the scope is cross-national. We aimed at piloting interoperability solutions building on three case studies relevant to population health research. Interoperability lies on four pillars; so: a) Legal frame (i.e., compliance with the GDPR, privacy- and security-by-design, and ethical standards); b) Organizational structure (e.g., availability and access to digital health data and governance of health information systems); c) Semantic developments (e.g., existence of metadata, availability of standards, data quality issues, coherence between data models and research purposes); and, d) Technical environment (e.g., how well documented are data processes, which are the dependencies linked to software components or alignment to standards). Results We have developed a federated research network architecture with 10 hubs each from a different country. This architecture has implied: a) the design of the data model that address the research questions; b) developing, distributing and deploying scripts for data extraction, transformation and analysis; and, c) retrieving the shared results for comparison or pooled meta-analysis. Lessons The development of a federated architecture for population health research is a technical solution that allows full compliance with interoperability pillars. The deployment of this type of solution where data remain in house under the governance and legal requirements of the data owners, and scripts for data extraction and analysis are shared across hubs, requires the implementation of capacity building measures. Key messages Population health research will benefit from the development of federated architectures that provide solutions to interoperability challenges. Case studies conducted within InfAct are providing valuable lessons to advance the design of a future pan-European research infrastructure.

The crucible of early career psychiatry

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-248
Author(s):  
Lillian Ng ◽  
Richard Steane ◽  
Natalie Scollay ◽  
Stephen Harris ◽  
Jasminka Milosevic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Collective Learning ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Role Transition ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
Career Trajectory ◽  
Consultant Psychiatrist ◽  
Deep Impact ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Written Reflection

Objective: To capture the voices of psychiatrists as they reflect on challenges at the early stages of the career trajectory. Method: Early career psychiatrists contributed reflections that identified various challenges in the transition from trainee to consultant psychiatrist. Results: Common difficulties included negotiating role transition and conflict. Specific events had deep impact such as involvement with a patient who had committed suicide. Conclusions: Challenges in the early career stage as a consultant psychiatrist may have lasting or career defining impact. Written reflection is a valuable tool that can impart collective learning, provide validation and engender support among peers.

The Association Between NRMN STAR Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy and Grant Submission

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 559-566
Author(s):  
Harlan P. Jones ◽  
Jamboor K. Vishwanatha ◽  
Edward L. Krug ◽  
Eileen Harwood ◽  
Kristin Eide Boman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Sex Education ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Training Institution ◽  
Federal Grant

Background: Eliminating the NIH fund­ing gap among underrepresented minori­ties (URMs) remains a high priority for the National Institutes of Health. In 2014, the National Research Mentoring Network1 Steps Toward Academic Research (NRMN STAR) program recruited postdoctoral, early-stage and junior faculty to participate in a 12-month grant writing and professional development program. The expectation of the program was to increase the number of grant submissions and awards to URM re­searchers. Although receiving a grant award is the gold standard of NRMN STAR, instill­ing confidence for postdocs and early-stage faculty to submit an application is a critical first step. Based on our previous study, a sustained increase in trainee self-efficacy score over a 24-month period was observed after completing NRMN STAR.Methods: The current study sought to determine the association between self-efficacy score and grant submissions among two cohorts of trainees. Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy was measured using a 19-item questionnaire previously described by and used in our own work, which was originally adapted from an 88-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory.2 A binary variable was created to identify trainees who submit­ted an initial or revised proposal vs those who abandoned their proposal or were still writing. Trainees were assessed prior to and following program completion with subsequent assessments at 6 and 12 months beyond participation.Results: As of June 20, 2019, 12 of the 21 (57%) trainees had submitted a grant proposal (eg, NIH, other federal or non-federal grant). For every point increase in 12-month post assessments, Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy scores across all domains had a 44% higher prevalence of submitting a grant after controlling for race, sex, education  level, academic rank, research experience, duration of postdoctoral training, institution type, and NRMN STAR cohort.  Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that NRMN STAR had a positive impact on trainees’ confidence in grant writing and professional development activities, which resulted in higher grant submis­sion rates.Ethn Dis. 2021;31(4):559-566; doi:10.18865/ed.31.4.559

scholarly journals HEADS-UP: Understanding and Problem-Solving

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (11) ◽  
pp. 3375-3381
Author(s):  
Bruce Ovbiagele
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Health Equity ◽  
Neurological Disorders ◽  
Underserved Populations ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Ethnic Disparities ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Scientific Content ◽  
Stroke Incidence ◽  
Racial Ethnic

There are substantial and longstanding inequities in stroke incidence, prevalence, care, and outcomes. The Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: Understanding and Problem-Solving (HEADS-UP) symposium is an annual multidisciplinary scientific and educational forum targeting major inequities in cerebrovascular disease, with the ultimate objective of helping to bridge major inequities in stroke, and promptly translating scientific results into routine clinical practice, for the benefit of vulnerable and underserved populations. HEADS-UP is a collaborative undertaking by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the American Stroke Association and is held the day before the annual International Stroke Conference. In 2020, the HEADS-UP focused on the topic of racial/ethnic disparities in stroke and comprised invited lectures on determinants of racial/ethnic inequities in stroke as well as emerging interventions or promising strategies designed to overcome these inequities. Competitively selected travel award scholarships were given to 19 early stage investigators who presented posters at professor moderated sessions; engaged in several career development activities aimed imparting grant writing skills, knowledge about climbing the academic ladder, and striving for work-life balance; and participated in networking events. This Health Equity edition of Focused Updates will feature an overview of the HEADS-UP 2020 symposium proceedings and articles covering the key scientific content of the major lectures delivered during the symposium including the presentation by the award-winning plenary speaker. Starting in 2021, HEADS-UP will expand to include 5 major inequities in stroke (racial/ethnic, sex, geographic, socioeconomic, and global) and seeks to be a viable avenue to meet the health equity goals of the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association, National Institutes of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and World Stroke Organization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document