Design and Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Health Disparities Research Curriculum

Reimagining a summer research program during COVID: Strategies for enhancing research workforce diversity

Well-designed, accessible short-term research training programs are needed to recruit and retain underrepresented persons into clinical and translational research training programs and diversify the workforce. The Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research developed a summer research program, training over 270 students in 15 years. In response to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, we pivoted swiftly from an in-person format to a fully remote format. We describe this process, focusing on factors of diversity, equity, and inclusion including enabling student participation in remote research activities. We collected data about students' learning experiences since the program's inception; therefore, we could evaluate the impact of remote vs. in-person formats. We examined data from five cohorts: three in-person (2017-2019; n = 57) and two remote (2020-2021; n = 45). While there was some concern about the value of participating in a remote format, overall students in both formats viewed the program favorably, with students in the remote cohorts rating some aspects of the program significantly more favorably. In addition, more students who identified as Black or African American participated in the remote format than in the in-person format. We describe lessons learned from this unprecedented challenge and future program directions.

Diversifying the Research Workforce as a Programmatic Priority for a Career Development Award Program at Duke University

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has prioritized efforts to increase diversity in the biomedical research workforce. NIH-funded institutional career development awards may serve as one mechanism to facilitate these efforts. In 2013, the Duke University KL2 program, an internal career development program funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, set a goal to increase the number of investigators from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups (UREGs) to ≥ 50% of KL2 awardees. From 2013 to 2019, 133 KL2 applications were received, 38% from UREG investigators. Of the 21 scholars selected, 10 (47.6%) were UREG investigators; all were Black/African American. This represents a threefold increase in the proportion of UREG applications and a sixfold increase in the proportion of UREG KL2 scholars compared with Duke's previous KL2 cycles (2003-2012), during which only 13% of applicants and 8.3% of funded scholars were UREGs. Of the 12 KL2 scholars (7 UREG) who completed the program, 5 have received NIH funding as principal investigators of an external K award or R01, and 4 of them are UREG investigators; this constitutes a post-KL2 NIH funding success rate of 57% (4/7) for UREG scholars. Achieving this programmatic priority was facilitated by institutional support, clear communication of goals to increase the proportion of UREG KL2 awardees, and intentional strategies to identify and support applicants. Strategies included targeted outreach to UREG investigators, partnerships with other institutional entities, structured assistance for investigators with preparing their applications, and a KL2 program structure addressing common barriers to success for UREG investigators, such as lack of consistent mentorship, protected research time, and peer support. The authors' experience suggests that KL2 and other internal career development programs may represent a scalable, national strategy to increase diversity in the biomedical research workforce.