Ten years of NIHR research training: perceptions of the programmes: a qualitative interview study

ObjectivesThe UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) training programmes were created to build and sustain research capacity in healthcare. Following the training programme 10-year strategic review, this qualitative study aimed to deepen understanding of facilitators and barriers for those progressing through NIHR-supported research careers.DesignSemistructured qualitative study.Data collection and analysisTelephone interviews conducted between May and August 2017 were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using Framework Approach.SettingUK National Health Service (NHS) Trusts, university medical schools, District General Hospitals, Integrated Academic Training Programme centres and Research Design Services across the North East, North West, South East and South West of England, London and the Midlands.ParticipantsFourteen women and eight men, of whom, 14 were previous or current NIHR personal awardees (seven doctors and seven allied health professionals (AHPs) or nurses) and eight were managers (staff within clinical or university training-related roles).Results(1) NIHR awards were viewed as transformative for research careers; (2) however, there were perceptions of a biased ‘playing field’. (3) Inequalities were perceived for AHPs and nurses, those outside of established research institutes and those in ‘unfashionable’ specialisms. (4) While support for NIHR awards contributed to a healthy research culture, (5) short-term awards were perceived as a barrier to continuing an independent research career.ConclusionsParticipants perceived many strengths of the NIHR training programmes in terms of developing individual careers and research capacity. Areas in which improvement could enhance the ability to attract, develop and retain researcher were identified. Our findings are of relevance to schemes in other countries, where healthcare researchers experience similar challenges. Further work is needed to overcome barriers and ensure equity of access to, and success within, clinical research training schemes to sustain the research workforce needed to address future global health challenges.

The Changing Landscape of Doctoral Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: PhD Students, Faculty Advisors, and Preferences for Varied Career Options

The landscape of graduate science education is changing as efforts to diversify the professoriate have increased because academic faculty jobs at universities have grown scarce and more competitive. With this context as a backdrop, the present research examines the perceptions and career goals of advisors and advisees through surveys of PhD students (Study 1, N = 195) and faculty mentors (Study 2, N = 272) in science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines. Study 1 examined actual preferences and career goals of PhD students among three options: research careers, teaching careers, and non-academic careers in industry, and compared the actual preferences of students with what they perceived as being the normative preferences of faculty. Overall, students had mixed preferences but perceived that their advisors had a strong normative preference for research careers for them. Moreover, students who ranked research positions as most desirable felt the most belonging in their academic departments. Further analyses revealed no differences in career preferences as a function of underrepresented minority (URM) student status or first-generation (FG) status, but URM and FG students felt less belonging in their academic departments. Study 2 examined faculty preferences for different careers for their advisees, both in general and for current students in particular. While faculty advisors preferred students to go into research in general, when focusing on specific students, they saw their preferences as being closely aligned with the career preference of each PhD student. Faculty advisors did not perceive any difference in belonging between their students as a function of their URM status. Discrepancies between student and faculty perceptions may occur, in part, because faculty and students do not engage in sufficient discussions about the wider range of career options beyond academic research. Supporting this possibility, PhD students and faculty advisors reported feeling more comfortable discussing research careers with each other than either non-academic industry positions or teaching positions. Discussion centers on the implications of these findings for interpersonal and institutional efforts to foster diversity in the professoriate and to create open communication about career development.

Gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research: a secondary cross-sectional cohort analysis

Background Though the proportion of women in medical schools has increased, gender disparities among those who pursue research careers still exists. In this study, we seek to better understand the main factors contributing to the existing gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research. Methods A secondary cross-sectional cohort analysis of previously published data was conducted using a 70-item survey that was sent to 16,418 medical students at 32 academic medical centers, and was IRB exempt from the need for ethical approval at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Pennsylvania. Data was collected from September 2012 to December 2014. Survey results were analyzed using chi-square tests and Cramer’s V to determine gender differences in demographic characteristics (training stage, race/ethnicity, marital status, parental status, financial support, and parental career background), career sector choice, career content choice, specialty choice, foreseeable career obstacles, and perceptions about medical research careers. Results Female respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD-only programs, while male respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD/PhD programs. More male students selected academia as their first-choice career sector, while more female respondents selected hospitalist as their first-choice career sector. More female respondents identified patient care and opportunities for community service as their top career selection factors, while more male respondents identified research and teaching as their top career selection factors. Student loan burden, future compensation, and work/life balance were the most reported obstacles to pursuing a career in medical research. Conclusions There are many factors from a medical student’s perspective that may contribute to the existing gender disparities in pursuing a career in medical research. While much progress has been made in attracting nearly equal numbers of men and women to the field of medicine, active efforts to bridge the gap between men and women in medical research careers are needed.

The form, rhythm, and orchestration of an academic career: Cultivating and navigating inner compasses within institutional terrains

The evolution of research careers is inherent to academic lives but rarely enters the research literature. In this autoethnographic paper, I reflect on composing, orchestrating, and performing my research journey. Shaped by intellectual and aesthetic pursuits, this journey is both experiential and conceptual, responsive to encounters with people and ideas that shaped my thinking and being. At the intersection of micro, macro, and meso contexts, the journey has been guided by inner compasses. While grounded within my own circumstances, the issues addressed in this article underlie academic trajectories. The article is written as an invitation to reflect on your own journeys and compasses; identify crossroads, blockages, and openings; and note evolving forms, changing rhythms, and nuanced orchestrations in the contrapuntal composition of life.

Gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research: A cross-sectional cohort analysis

Background: Though the proportion of women in medical schools has increased, gender disparities among those who pursue research careers still exists. In this study, we seek to better understand the main factors contributing to the existing gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research.Methods: A cross-sectional cohort analysis was conducted using a 70-item survey that was sent to 16,418 medical students at 32 academic medical centers and was IRB approved at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Pennsylvania. Data was collected from September 2012 to December 2014. Survey results were analyzed using chi-square tests to determine gender differences in demographic characteristics (training stage, race/ethnicity, marital status, parental status, financial support, and parental career background), career sector choice, career content choice, specialty choice, foreseeable career obstacles, and perceptions about medical research careers. Results: There were 4433 respondents (27% response rate). Female respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD-only programs, while male respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD/PhD programs. More male trainees selected academia as their first-choice career sector, while more female respondents selected hospitalist as their first-choice career sector. More female respondents identified patient care and opportunities for community service as their top career selection factors, while more male respondents identified research and teaching as their top career selection factors. Conclusions: There are many factors from a medical student’s perspective that contribute to the existing gender disparities in pursuing a career in medical research, including student loan burden, future compensation, work/life balance, and family/caretaker obligations. While much progress has been made in attracting nearly equal numbers of men and women to the field of medicine, active efforts to bridge the gap between men and women in medical research careers are needed.