Models of interinstitutional partnerships between research intensive universities and minority serving institutions (MSI) across the Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium

Advancing Diversity in Behavior Genetics: Strategies for Incorporating Undergraduates into Student-Driven Research

Undergraduate research experiences are crucial for fostering the next generation of behavior genetics researchers. However, incorporating undergraduates into research can be challenging for faculty mentors. In this article, we provide strategies for successfully integrating undergraduates into behavior genetics research based on our experiences mentoring undergraduates in our lab. These strategies include: (1) Practicing reflexivity, specifically an ongoing self-examination and critical self-awareness of personal biases, beliefs, and practices; (2) Implementing an Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access (IDEA) centered approach; (3) empowering students through clear expectations; (4) Providing focused training and mentorship; (5) Aligning research projects with student interests; (6) Assigning meaningful tasks; and (7) Facilitating professional development opportunities. By following these strategies, faculty mentors can cultivate a supportive and inclusive research environment that empowers undergraduates for successful careers in behavior genetics research.

Reviewing fair subject selection considerations for the unique case of post sequelae COVID-19 translational studies

Fair inclusion of research subjects is necessary to ensure that post-acute sequelae COVID-19 (PASC) research results benefit all members of society. Scientists should conduct research on a broad sample of individuals who represent clinically relevant factors influencing a disease. Without demographic diversity and sociological and environmental variability, research outputs are less likely to apply to different populations and would thus increase health disparities. The goal of this narrative literature review and ethical analysis is to apply fair selection criteria to PASC research studies. We briefly highlight the importance of fair subject selection in translational research and then identify features of PASC, as well as PASC research, that hinder fair inclusion of research participants. We will demonstrate that determining an adequate and representative sample is not simply a matter of ensuring greater diversity; rather, fairness requires a broader evaluation of risks, burdens, and benefits specific to underrepresented populations. We provide recommendations to ensure fair subject selection in PASC research and promote translation toward positive health outcomes for all individuals, including the most vulnerable.

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.

Strengthening and Sustaining Inter-Institutional Research Collaborations and Partnerships

Inter-institutional collaborations and partnerships play fundamental roles in developing and diversifying the basic biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research enterprise at resource-limited, minority-serving institutions. In conjunction with the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Program National Conference in Bethesda, Maryland, in December 2019, a special workshop was convened to summarize current practices and to explore future strategies to strengthen and sustain inter-institutional collaborations and partnerships with research-intensive majority-serving institutions. Representative examples of current inter-institutional collaborations at RCMI grantee institutions are presented. Practical approaches used to leverage institutional resources through collaborations and partnerships within regional and national network programs are summarized. Challenges and opportunities related to such collaborations are provided.

Building a Diverse Workforce and Thinkforce to Reduce Health Disparities

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Program was congressionally mandated in 1985 to build research capacity at institutions that currently and historically recruit, train, and award doctorate degrees in the health professions and health-related sciences, primarily to individuals from underrepresented and minority populations. RCMI grantees share similar infrastructure needs and institutional goals. Of particular importance is the professional development of multidisciplinary teams of academic and community scholars (the "workforce") and the harnessing of the heterogeneity of thought (the "thinkforce") to reduce health disparities. The purpose of this report is to summarize the presentations and discussion at the RCMI Investigator Development Core (IDC) Workshop, held in conjunction with the RCMI Program National Conference in Bethesda, Maryland, in December 2019. The RCMI IDC Directors provided information about their professional development activities and Pilot Projects Programs and discussed barriers identified by new and early-stage investigators that limit effective career development, as well as potential solutions to overcome such obstacles. This report also proposes potential alignments of professional development activities, targeted goals and common metrics to track productivity and success.

Mentoring New and Early-Stage Investigators and Underrepresented Minority Faculty for Research Success in Health-Related Fields: An Integrative Literature Review (2010-2020)

Mentoring to develop research skills is an important strategy for facilitating faculty success. The purpose of this study was to conduct an integrative literature review to examine the barriers and facilitators to mentoring in health-related research, particularly for three categories: new investigators (NI), early-stage investigators (ESI) and underrepresented minority faculty (UMF). PsychINFO, CINAHL and PubMed were searched for papers published in English from 2010 to 2020, and 46 papers were reviewed. Most papers recommended having multiple mentors and many recommended assessing baseline research skills. Barriers and facilitators were both individual and institutional. Individual barriers mentioned most frequently were a lack of time and finding work-life balance. UMF mentioned barriers related to bias, discrimination and isolation. Institutional barriers included lack of mentors, lack of access to resources, and heavy teaching and service loads. UMF experienced institutional barriers such as devaluation of experience or expertise. Individual facilitators were subdivided and included writing and synthesis as technical skills, networking and collaborating as interpersonal skills, and accountability, leadership, time management, and resilience/grit as personal skills. Institutional facilitators included access to mentoring, professional development opportunities, and workload assigned to research. Advocacy for diversity and cultural humility were included as unique interpersonal and institutional facilitators for UMF. Several overlapping and unique barriers and facilitators to mentoring for research success for NI, ESI and UMF in the health-related disciplines are presented.

Rural Community Engagement for Health Disparities Research: The Unique Role of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)

Reducing health disparities in rural communities of color remains a national concern. Efforts to reduce health disparities often center on community engagement, which is historically the strategy used to provide rural minority populations with support to access and utilize health information and services. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), with their origins derived from social injustices and discrimination, are uniquely positioned to conduct this type of engagement. We present the "Research with Care" project, a long-standing positive working relationship between North Carolina Central University (NCCU) and rural Halifax County, North Carolina, demonstrating an effective campus-community partnership. The importance of readiness to implement Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) principles is underscored. As demonstrated by the NCCU-Halifax partnership, we recommend leveraging the positive associations of the HBCU brand identity as a method of building and sustaining meaningful relationships with rural Black communities. This underscores the role and value of HBCUs in the health disparities research arena and should be communicated and embraced.

Using the payback framework to evaluate the outcomes of pilot projects supported by the Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance

Introduction

The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) seeks to improve population health by accelerating the translation of scientific discoveries in the laboratory and clinic into practices for the community. CTSAs achieve this goal, in part, through their pilot project programs that fund promising early career investigators and innovative early-stage research projects across the translational research spectrum. However, there have been few reports on individual pilot projects and their impacts on the investigators who receive them and no studies on the long-term impact and outcomes of pilot projects.

Methods

The Georgia CTSA funded 183 pilot projects from 2007 to 2015. We used a structured evaluation framework, the payback framework, to document the outcomes of 16 purposefully-selected pilot projects supported by the Georgia CTSA. We used a case study approach including bibliometric analyses of publications associated with the selected projects, document review, and investigator interviews.

Results

These pilot projects had positive impact based on outcomes in five "payback categories": (1) knowledge; (2) research targeting, capacity building, and absorption; (3) policy and product development; (4) health benefits; and (5) broader economic benefits.

Conclusions

Results could inform our understanding of the diversity and breadth of outcomes resulting from Georgia CTSA-supported research and provide a framework for evaluating long-term pilot project outcomes across CTSAs.

The NIDDK High School Short-Term Research Experience for Underrepresented Persons

Background

Increasing the pipeline of aspiring minority biomedical/health professionals is a crucial component to diversifying the health science workforce. The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) created the High School Short-Term Research Experience for Underrepresented Persons (HS-STEP-UP) to provide introductory biomedical/biobehavioral research experiences to promising high school students, who are traditionally underrepresented in the biomedical/biobehavioral sciences. The program reaches out to African American and Lationo/Hispanic students, as well as Native American students and students from the United States Territories.

Methods

HS-STEP-UP provides a stimulating, rigorous 8- to 10-week summer research experience for a national cohort of ~100 high school students each year; the experience is organized through four National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded coordinating centers. Typically, the program receives about 300 applications a year and about 100 students are accepted. Applicants are reviewed and selected based upon their online application that includes: a high school transcript, list of classes and extracurricular activities, two recommendation letters and a personal statement. The program culminates with a symposium at the NIH where students present their research and attend workshops and seminars.

Results

For the 2017 and 2018 HS-STEP-UP programs, the classes included 193 students; 67% were females and 82% were underrepresented minorities. Forty eight percent of students reported a family income <$37,000/year, and 23% were from first generation college families. Ninety percent were very satisfied or satisfied with their research topic and 94% rated the end of the year symposium at NIH as excellent or very good. Only 65% were very satisfied or satisfied with their mentor matching, and 21% stated they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their mentor. All the students successfully completed their summer research projects and presented their research abstracts at the symposium. All participating seniors reported attending college.

Conclusion

HS-STEP-UP has been highly successful in recruiting traditionally underrepresented students and supporting underrepresented HS students with a rewarding introductory experience to research. Students are overall satisfied with the program, but mentor matching needs more attention. Longer-term follow-up is needed to determine how participating in STEP UP impacts their decisions to participate in the biomedical workforce in the future.

Building Cross-Institutional Collaborative Infrastructure and Processes: Early Lessons From the Chicago Cancer Health Equity Collaborative

BACKGROUND

Addressing cancer health disparities requires a multitiered, comprehensive approach. The Chicago Cancer Health Equity Collaborative (ChicagoCHEC) was established as a tri-institutional partnership to advance cancer health equity through scientific discovery, education, and community engagement.

OBJECTIVES

Large-scale partnerships rarely document the challenges encountered when establishing processes and operations in the formative years of engagement. We outline selected lessons learned from the first three years of ChicagoCHEC in hopes that future collaborations may be better poised to hit the ground running and create the needed infrastructure for a strong, effective, and sustainable partnership.

LESSONS LEARNED

Unifying a diverse group of stakeholders under a shared mission is imperative. A shared governance structure, in which all individuals understand the aims of partnership and can facilitate progress, is crucial for success. Ongoing monitoring of collaborative processes should occur and attention should be given to the optimization of communications.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-scale collaborative research and education projects across institutions can be challenging, particularly when establishing a working infrastructure and aligning priorities. However, the benefit of establishing key processes in the early years of the collaborative process can lead to high-quality research output, impact, and a sustainable partnership.

The Association of Black Cardiologists (ABC) Cardiovascular Implementation Study (CVIS): A Research Registry Integrating Social Determinants to Support Care for Underserved Patients

African Americans, other minorities and underserved populations are consistently under- represented in clinical trials. Such underrepresentation results in a gap in the evidence base, and health disparities. The ABC Cardiovascular Implementation Study (CVIS) is a comprehensive prospective cohort registry that integrates social determinants of health. ABC CVIS uses real world clinical practice data to address critical gaps in care by facilitating robust participation of African Americans and other minorities in clinical trials. ABC CVIS will include diverse patients from collaborating ABC member private practices, as well as patients from academic health centers and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). This paper describes the rationale and design of the ABC CVIS Registry. The registry will: (1) prospectively collect socio-demographic, clinical and biospecimen data from enrolled adults, adolescents and children with prioritized cardiovascular diseases; (2) Evaluate the safety and clinical outcomes of new therapeutic agents, including post marketing surveillance and pharmacovigilance; (3) Support National Institutes of Health (NIH) and industry sponsored research; (4) Support Quality Measures standards from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Commercial Health Plans. The registry will utilize novel data and technology tools to facilitate mobile health technology application programming interface (API) to health system or practice electronic health records (EHR). Long term, CVIS will become the most comprehensive patient registry for underserved diverse patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and co morbid conditions, providing real world data to address health disparities. At least 10,000 patients will be enrolled from 50 sites across the United States.

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Translational Research Network: Building and Sustaining Capacity for Multi-Site Basic Biomedical, Clinical and Behavioral Research

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) program was established by the US Congress to support the development of biomedical research infrastructure at minority-serving institutions granting doctoral degrees in the health professions or in a health-related science. RCMI institutions also conduct research on diseases that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities (ie, African Americans/Blacks, American Indians and Alaska Natives, Hispanics, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders), those of low socioeconomic status, and rural persons. Quantitative metrics, including the numbers of doctoral science degrees granted to underrepresented students, NIH peer-reviewed research funding, peer-reviewed publications, and numbers of racial and ethnic minorities participating in sponsored research, demonstrate that RCMI grantee institutions have made substantial progress toward the intent of the Congressional legislation, as well as the NIH/NIMHD-linked goals of addressing workforce diversity and health disparities. Despite this progress, nationally, many challenges remain, including persistent disparities in research and career development awards to minority investigators. The continuing underrepresentation of minority investigators in NIH-sponsored research across multiple disease areas is of concern, in the face of unrelenting national health inequities. With the collaborative network support by the RCMI Translational Research Network (RTRN), the RCMI community is uniquely positioned to address these challenges through its community engagement and strategic partnerships with non-RCMI institutions. Funding agencies can play an important role by incentivizing such collaborations, and incorporating metrics for research funding that address underrepresented populations, workforce diversity and health equity.

Promoting Diversity in the Clinical and Translational Research Workforce

The positive impact of diversity in increasing the effectiveness of the research workforce has been undeniably demonstrated to be an essential element for achieving health equity. Diversity is also instrumental for the research workforce to advance discovery, eliminate health disparities, improve minority health and achieve effective patient-centered outcomes in the quest for better health. One of the sustainable ways to achieve diversity in the workforce is through training, education and career development of all interested individuals including minority, underserved, underrepresented and populations with special needs. A Hispanic public, academic health center, and a historically black private medical school, have joined efforts in this article to share their experiences in addressing diversity in the clinical and translational research workforce with grant support from the National Institutes of Health. The purpose of this paper is to describe how diversity has been achieved through a concerted effort to recruit and develop underrepresented junior faculty and doctoral candidates for successful careers in clinical and translational research focused on health disparities and minority health. We describe Initiatives designed to achieve diversity in recruitment and development of research teams, together with an evaluation of outcomes to determine the success of the program and its participants.

Charting the Publication and Citation Impact of the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program From 2006 Through 2016

PURPOSE

The authors evaluated publication and citation patterns for articles supported by Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) hub investment over the first decade of the CTSA program. The aim was to elucidate a pivotal step in the translational process by providing an account of how time, hub maturity, and hub attributes were related to productivity and influence in the academic literature.

METHOD

In 2017, the authors collected bibliometric data from PubMed, Web of Science InCites, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) iCite for articles citing any CTSA hub grants published from hub inception through 2016. They compiled data on publication and citation rates and indices of relative citation impact aggregated by hub funding year cohort. They compared hub-level bibliometric activity by multi- versus single-institution structure and total monetary award sums, compiled from NIH RePORTER.

RESULTS

From 2006-2016, CTSA hubs supported over 66,000 publications, with publication rates accelerating as hubs matured. These publications accumulated over 1.2 million citations, with some articles cited over 1,000 times. Indices of relative citation impact indicated CTSA-supported publications were cited more than twice as often as expected for articles of their publication years and disciplines. Multi-institutional hubs and those awarded higher grant sums exhibited significantly higher publication and citation activity.

CONCLUSIONS

The CTSA program is yielding a robust and growing body of influential research findings with consistently high indices of relative citation impact. Preliminary evidence suggests multi-institutional collaborations and more monetary resources are associated with elevated bibliometric activity and, therefore, may be worth their investment.

Building Diverse Careers in Clinical and Translational Research: Evaluation of a Certificate Program in Translational Research

Introduction

The Certificate Program in Translational Research (CPTR) at the Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance provides Ph.D. students, postdoctoral fellows and faculty with didactic, mentored, and experiential training in clinical and translational research.

Methods

Quantitative evaluation includes tracking trainee competency, publications, grants and careers in clinical and translational research. Qualitative evaluation includes interviews with trainees about program experiences.

Results

The CPTR provided knowledge and skills in clinical and translational research through coursework, clinical rotations, and collaboration with interdisciplinary scientists. Trainees reported increased confidence in 22 program competencies. Trainees have published more than 290 peer-reviewed articles and received over $4 million in grants from the NIH, over $15 million from the U.S. Department of Defense, and more than $300,000 from foundations. Trainees who completed the program remained in clinical and translational research.

Conclusions

Programs like the CPTR are needed to train investigators to advance biomedical discoveries into population health.

Health Sciences Libraries Advancing Collaborative Clinical Research Data Management in Universities

PURPOSE

Medical libraries need to actively review their service models and explore partnerships with other campus entities to provide better-coordinated clinical research management services to faculty and researchers. TRAIL (Translational Research and Information Lab), a five-partner initiative at the University of Washington (UW), explores how best to leverage existing expertise and space to deliver clinical research data management (CRDM) services and emerging technology support to clinical researchers at UW and collaborating institutions in the Pacific Northwest.

METHODS

The initiative offers 14 services and a technology-enhanced innovation lab located in the Health Sciences Library (HSL) to support the University of Washington clinical and research enterprise. Sharing of staff and resources merges library and non-library workflows, better coordinating data and innovation services to clinical researchers. Librarians have adopted new roles in CRDM, such as providing user support and training for UW's Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) instance.

RESULTS

TRAIL staff are quickly adapting to changing workflows and shared services, including teaching classes on tools used to manage clinical research data. Researcher interest in TRAIL has sparked new collaborative initiatives and service offerings. Marketing and promotion will be important for raising researchers' awareness of available services.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical librarians are developing new skills by supporting and teaching CRDM. Clinical and data librarians better understand the information needs of clinical and translational researchers by being involved in the earlier stages of the research cycle and identifying technologies that can improve healthcare outcomes. At health sciences libraries, leveraging existing resources and bringing services together is central to how university medical librarians will operate in the future.

Reducing Cardiovascular Disparities Through Community-Engaged Implementation Research: A National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop Report

Cardiovascular disparities remain pervasive in the United States. Unequal disease burden is evident among population groups based on sex, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, educational attainment, nativity, or geography. Despite the significant declines in cardiovascular disease mortality rates in all demographic groups during the last 50 years, large disparities remain by sex, race, ethnicity, and geography. Recent data from modeling studies, linked micromap plots, and small-area analyses also demonstrate prominent variation in cardiovascular disease mortality rates across states and counties, with an especially high disease burden in the southeastern United States and Appalachia. Despite these continued disparities, few large-scale intervention studies have been conducted in these high-burden populations to examine the feasibility of reducing or eliminating cardiovascular disparities. To address this challenge, on June 22 and 23, 2017, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened experts from a broad range of biomedical, behavioral, environmental, implementation, and social science backgrounds to summarize the current state of knowledge of cardiovascular disease disparities and propose intervention strategies aligned with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute mission. This report presents the themes, challenges, opportunities, available resources, and recommended actions discussed at the workshop.

Strategies for enhancing research in aging health disparities by mentoring diverse investigators

Introduction

The Resource Centers for Minority Aging Research (RCMAR) program was launched in 1997. Its goal is to build infrastructure to improve the well-being of older racial/ethnic minorities by identifying mechanisms to reduce health disparities.

Methods

Its primary objectives are to mentor faculty in research addressing the health of minority elders and to enhance the diversity of the workforce that conducts elder health research by prioritizing the mentorship of underrepresented diverse scholars.

Results

Through 2015, 12 centers received RCMAR awards and provided pilot research funding and mentorship to 361 scholars, 70% of whom were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. A large majority (85%) of RCMAR scholars from longstanding centers continue in academic research. Another 5% address aging and other health disparities through nonacademic research and leadership roles in public health agencies.

Conclusions

Longitudinal, team-based mentoring, cross-center scholar engagement, and community involvement in scholar development are important contributors to RCMAR’s success.

Social Determinants of HIV Disparities in the Southern United States and in Counties with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), 2013-2014

HIV infection disproportionately affects Blacks in the southern United States (U.S.), a region where legal policies that may unintentionally impede earlier HIV detection and treatment are prevalent. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have historically facilitated social change in communities of color and have been underexplored as partners for HIV prevention. We describe geographic and social determinants of health (SDH) in the southern U.S. to inform potential HBCU-public health partnerships that might improve HIV health equity. We evaluated the relationship between county-level HIV prevalences (2013), HBCU geographic coordinates, and SDH variables in the southern counties with HBCUs. U.S. Census-derived SDH variables included race/ethnicity (i.e., Black, White, Hispanic), unemployment, female head of household, poverty, percent owner-occupied housing units, urbanicity, and primary care provider rates. Associations were assessed using bivariate and multivariable linear regression. Of 104 HBCUs in the contiguous U.S., 100 (96%) were located in 69 southern counties with average Black populations of 40% and an average HIV prevalence of 615. 5 per 100,000, over two times the national rate (295.1 per 100,000). In bivariable analyses, higher HIV rates in these counties were associated with higher percent Black population, unemployment, female head of household, poverty, fewer owner-occupied housing units, and greater urbanicity (p < 0.05). In multivariable analyses, counties with higher HIV rates had higher percentages of Blacks, greater urbanicity, fewer owner-occupied housing units, and more female heads of households (p < 0.05). The southern U.S. is disproportionately affected by HIV, and many HBCUs are located in affected southern counties. HBCUs may be important public health partners for helping to develop structural interventions that strengthen HIV policies in support of health equity in these southern, mostly urban counties.

Leading by Success: Impact of a Clinical and Translational Research Infrastructure Program to Address Health Inequities

Building research infrastructure capacity to address clinical and translational gaps has been a focus of funding agencies and foundations. Clinical and Translational Sciences Awards, Research Centers in Minority Institutions Infrastructure for Clinical and Translational Research (RCTR), and the Institutional Development Award Infrastructure for Clinical and Translational Research funded by the US government to fund clinical translational research programs have existed for over a decade to address racial and ethnic health disparities across the USA. While the impact on the nation's health cannot be made in a short period, assessment of a program's impact could be a litmus test to gauge its effectiveness at the institution and communities. We report the success of a Pilot Project Program in the University of Hawaii RCTR Award in advancing careers of emerging investigators and community collaborators. Our findings demonstrated that the investment has a far-reaching impact on engagement with community-based research collaborators, career advancement of health disparity investigators, and favorable impacts on health policy.