Rescuing the physician-scientist workforce: the time for action is now

Medical School Regulatory Compliance Burdens for the Physician-Scientist

Medical school research faculty is increasingly required to complete more comprehensive and time consuming compliance steps for regulatory oversight. These relate to animal studies, information technology, biosafety, and human resources. For physician-scientists, the additional role in clinical care adds to these research areas with regulatory compliance in patient care and ever-growing web trainings. The sum of all these compliance regimes is a considerable time and cost burden, diminished research performance, and disengagement of faculty from colleagues, collaborations, and institutions. Many research and clinical compliance processes were put in place, often using legacy systems, in well-meaning attempts to address straightforward regulations in humane animal care, safe use of biological agents, and medical care delivery. However, their accumulation and negative impact on faculty performance demand time, energy, and resources that impact academic productivity. There are solutions to a relentlessly increasing regulatory load for research faculty, which involve vertical integration, convergence, and performance assessment in medical school and health system compliance regimes. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:417-422.

Enhancing the physician-scientist workforce: evaluating a mentored research program for medical students' research competencies and intentions

Background

The growing recognition of the need to incorporate scientific discoveries into healthcare decisions underscores an urgency for a robust physician-scientist workforce to advance translational research. Despite the correlation between medical students' research engagement and their academic productivity and success, significant gaps remain in the scientific workforce exacerbated by the "leaky pipeline" phenomenon from medical school to academic medicine, where potential physician-scientists veer away from research careers.The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a structured mentored research program for enhancing medical students' research competencies and sustaining their interest in research careers, thereby potentially enhancing the physician-scientist workforce.

Methods

The Medical Student Research Program (MSRP) implemented at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) was designed to provide comprehensive research training and support to medical students through a series of structured lectures, mentorship by dedicated faculty, and administrative support for research activities. Students were surveyed upon enrollment and one year later to assess the change in research competencies from baseline to follow-up (paired samples t-test), students' intent to use research in clinical practice (paired samples t-test), and their intent to conduct research in the future (McNemar's test and McNemar Bowker test).

Results

Preliminary evaluations indicated that the MSRP enhanced students' research competencies and has the potential to enhance medical students' research skills. However, similar to national trends, there was a decrease in students' intentions to engage with research in their future clinical career.

Conclusions

Our preliminary findings demonstrate MSRP students' enhanced research competencies during the first year of the program. However, the decline in students' intentions to engage in future research highlights the need for continued innovation in research training programs to sustain future intent to conduct research, in turn helping to address the "leaky pipeline" in the physician-scientist workforce. Future studies should focus on mid and long-term outcomes to fully assess research program impact on the physician-scientist pipeline and on integrating such programs more broadly into medical education.

The Impact of the Psychiatry Medical Student Scholars Program

OBJECTIVE

Providing medical students with psychiatry research opportunities early in their careers may contribute to fostering career interests and increasing research literacy and interest. In this report, the authors describe the Psychiatry Medical Student Scholars Program (MSSP) at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine and the results from a survey of its impact on student career outcomes over 9 years.

METHODS

All MSSP participants were invited to complete an online survey via SurveyMonkey to assess the impact of the program on their interest in psychiatry and research.

RESULTS

The MSSP began in 2012 with one student. There have been 47 MSSP participants from 2012 to 2021. Rapid growth of the MSSP was seen with class sizes ranging from 1 to 11. At the time of survey, nineteen MSSP alumni graduated medical school and 28 were still in medical school. Sixty-six percent of eligible participants responded, with a 53% response rate for medical school alumni and a 75% response rate for current medical students. Nine out of nineteen (47%) MSSP students who had graduated from medical school selected a career in psychiatry. Eighty-four percent of participants had presented or published their research. Sixty-eight percent of participants reported that the program has been valuable in deciding their future specialty.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants tended to credit exposure to psychiatric research as medical students with fostering interest in the field and aiding in their career decisions. The components of the program described can be replicated at other institutions to increase exposure to psychiatric research.

American Society of Nephrology Kidney Tutored Research and Education for Kidney Scholars (TREKS) Program: A 10-Year Interim Analysis

In response to decreasing numbers of individuals entering into nephrology fellowships, the American Society of Nephrology launched Kidney Tutored Research and Education for Kidney Scholars (TREKS) to stimulate interest in nephrology among medical students, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows. The program combines a 1-week intensive exposure to kidney physiology with a longitudinal mentorship program at the participants' home institutions. Ten years in, an analysis was conducted to assess its effectiveness. We surveyed participants to assess their opinions regarding nephrology before and after the course and followed them longitudinally to determine their career choices. TREKS applicants who were not selected to participate were used as a comparison group. Three hundred eighty-one people participated in the program, and 242 completed the survey. After TREKS, both medical students and graduate students showed increased interest in nephrology, with rank scores of 5.6±0.2 before to 7.5±0.1 after the course for medical students (mean±SD, n =189, P = 0.001) and 7.3±0.3 to 8.7±0.3 ( n =53, P = 0.001) for graduate students. In long-term follow-up, TREKS medical students chose a nephrology pipeline residency at a higher rate than medical students overall (57% versus 31%, P = 0.01) and TREKS applicants who did not participate (47% versus 31%, P = 0.04). Nephrology fellowship rates for these groups exceeded the general population but did not significantly differ between TREKS participants and applicants. Doctor of Philosophy students and postdoctoral TREKS participants had a higher rate of participation in nephrology research compared with TREKS applicants (66% versus 30%, P = 0.01). In summary, the American Society of Nephrology Kidney TREKS program has demonstrated that it can increase interest in nephrology in the short term and increase the number of individuals going into nephrology careers. This long-term effect is most evident in Doctor of Philosophy students and postdoctoral participants. Further study is needed to assess the impact of TREKS on enrollment in nephrology fellowship programs.

Publication Fate of Research Works Achieved During Master's Degree in Surgical Science in a French Survey

The aim of this study was to assess the publication fate of research projects performed during the research year by students enrolled in a Master's degree (MSc) of surgical science and to identify factors associated with subsequent publication. An anonymous online survey of 35 questions was sent to students enrolled in MSc of surgical science between 2013 and 2020. The questionnaire included student's characteristics, topic, and supervision of the research projects developed during the research year and dissemination of the research work. Data regarding publication was collected using PubMed database. Factors associated with publication were identified by univariate analysis. Among 361 students, 26% completed the survey. Among respondents, the publication rate of research projects was 53.7%. The median time interval between the end of the research year and the date of publication was 2 (1-3) years. The student was listed as a first author in 70.6% of publications. Factors associated with publication of the research work completed during the research year were student's previous publications (P = 0.041) and presentation of the research work in academic conferences (P = 0.005). The most mentioned cause for non-publication was the absence of completion of the research work. Among respondents, the publication rate of research works performed during the MSc was high, which emphasizes the quality of the work carried out by the students and their involvement. Significant efforts must be undertaken to encourage the enrollment of residents in scientific research.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-023-01973-y.

Establishment of the Clinician-Scientist Investigator Opportunity Network to Develop Military Medical Research Leaders

INTRODUCTION

The ability of military clinicians to conduct military medical research is often limited because of competing priorities and a lack of research mentorship. The Clinician-Scientist Investigator Opportunity Network (CSION) was developed with the intent of training clinicians how to engage in requirements-driven research within the DoD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three to five academic medical faculties were selected from a pool of applicants each year to participate in a 2-year research fellowship. To be eligible for the CSION program, applicants had to meet the following criteria: (1) Completed residency graduate medical education training, (2) not be currently enrolled as a graduate medical education trainee, and (3) obtained permission from their department leadership to focus 25% of their duty hours on CSION participation to include didactic and research efforts. The remaining 75% of fellows' time was dedicated to clinical duties. Monthly didactics, intensive mentorship, and consistent support were offered to each fellow by the CSION leadership team. Metrics were recorded to include both research and clinical productivity.

RESULTS

Between January 2019 and December 2022, 12 CSION fellows graduated from the program (four in the class of 2020, three in 2021, and five in 2022). From 2019 to 2021, the 12 CSION fellows initiated 204 research protocols, generated 489 publications/presentations, and secured 33 research grants. All graduates of the program remain active in clinical research with multiple graduates currently assigned to research positions.

CONCLUSIONS

The CSION research education program is a 2-year additional duty research fellowship producing clinician-scientists conducting military-relevant medical research and publications and may be considered a low-cost/highly efficient alternative to achieve the reported benefits of the MD-PhD tract. The expansion of the CSION program may improve the quality of military medical research and health care.

A comparative analysis of the doctoral regulations at the medical faculties in Germany

Objective: In order to be allowed to use the title "Dr. med." in Germany, an independent scientific achievement under the supervision of an established scientist is necessary. The research question, analysis and results are essentially carried out and developed independently by the doctoral student. The doctorate serves as proof that the doctoral candidate is capable of independent academic work. The acquisition of scientific skills and knowledge is of particular importance in medicine, as Germany´s international competitiveness is based on the education of today´s young academics. Fair conditions and uniform quality standards for doctoral studies are therefore indispensable to attract future young scientists at an early stage. Methods: The currently valid doctoral regulations of the medical faculties in Germany were analysed with regards to the following target criteria; update date, dissertation language, possibility of publication-based dissertation and its details (number of first and total authorships, publication organ), knowledge of methods and consideration of "Good Medical Practice" (GMP), plagiarism check, review process and disputation. Results: All faculties with the right to award doctorates, and, thus 40 valid regulations were included in the analysis. This revealed a great divergence in the requirements for doctoral candidates. Although a publication-based doctorate is now possible at 93% (n=37) of the faculties, in addition to the monographic dissertation, the required first and total authorships vary from one required first authorship (n=26, 70%) to two or three first authorships (n=5, 14%), as well as some faculties having no information regarding the number of publications (n=6, 16%). The quality of the publication organ was not described in detail in seven faculties (19%). To ensure quality, requirements have increasingly been anchored in the regulations, so that 22 regulations (56%) now stipulate participation in courses on GMP or qualification programmes. The regulations leave a lot of room for manoeuvre in terms of content and do not allow for comparability of the conditions for preparing doctoral researchers. The specifications range from mere mention, to instruction, to compulsory course participation. Another means of quality assurance is the prevention of plagiarism through the applications of software systems. However, this simple and effective means is not yet mentioned in 65% of the regulations (n=26). While the other regulations make use of this possibility, it is not an obligatory application. A total of 34 regulations provide for the regular drawing up of a supervision agreement to define the rights and obligations of the actors involved. Conclusion: The analysis showed a divergent picture. Although imprecise regulations or gaps in information allow scope for design, they also prevent transparency. Despite revisions of many regulations in the past, these revisions have not led to any significant harmonisation. The implementation of standardised and structured doctoral programmes is desirable and could be tackled within the framework of the planned amendment of medical studies. This opens up the possibility of dealing efficiently with the scarce resource of time in the face of competing curriculum content and of making a doctoral project more attractive to potential young scientists at an early stage.

A continuing clinical education course to maintain clinical competencies and foster new clinical knowledge during the graduate school years of MD-PhD training

Introduction

Most students in MD-PhD programs take a leave of absence from medical school to complete PhD training, which promotes a natural loss of clinical skills and knowledge and could negatively impact a student's long-term clinical knowledge. To address this concern, clinical refresher courses in the final year of PhD training have traditionally been used; however, effectiveness of such courses versus a longitudinal clinical course spanning all PhD training years is unclear.

Methods

The University of Alabama at Birmingham MD-PhD Program implemented a comprehensive continuing clinical education (CCE) course spanning PhD training years that features three course components: (1) clinical skills; (2) clinical knowledge; and (3) specialty exposure activities. To evaluate course effectiveness, data from an anonymous student survey completed at the end of each semester were analyzed.

Results

Five hundred and ninety-seven surveys were completed by MD-PhD students from fall 2014 to 2022. Survey responses indicated that the majority of students found the course helpful to: maintain clinical skills and knowledge (544/597, 91% and 559/597, 94%; respectively), gain exposure to clinical specialties (568/597, 95%), and prepare them for responsibilities during clinical clerkships. During semesters following lockdowns from the COVID-19 pandemic, there were significant drops in students' perceived preparedness.

Conclusions

Positive student survey feedback and improved preparedness to return to clinic after development of the course suggests the CCE course is a useful approach to maintain clinical knowledge during research training.

Physician-scientist trainees with parenting responsibilities need financial and childcare support

Physician–scientists who become parents during their long period of training need additional funding and support for lactation, childcare and healthcare, to ensure an equitable workforce.

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.

An emerging field: An evaluation of biomedical graduate student and postdoctoral education and training research across seven decades

Biomedical graduate student and postdoctoral education and training research has expanded greatly over the last seven decades, leading to increased publications and the emergence of a field. The goal of this study was to analyze this growth by performing a cross-sectional bibliometric analysis using a systematic approach to better understand the publishing trends (including historical vs. emerging themes and research priorities); depth, structure, and evidence-basis of content; and venues for publication. The analysis documented a dramatic increase in biomedical trainee-related publications over time and showed that this area of research is maturing into its own independent field. Results demonstrated that the most frequently published article types in this field are shorter editorial and opinion pieces, and that evidence-based articles are less numerous. However, if current trends continue, projections indicate that by the year 2035, evidence-based articles will be the dominating article type published in this field. Most frequently published topics included career outcomes and workforce characterization and professional development. In recent years, the most cited articles were publications focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion, career outcomes and workforce characterization, and wellness. This study also shows that although a small subset of journals publishes most of this literature, publications are distributed diffusely across a wide range of journals and that surprisingly 68% of these journals have published only a single article on the topic. Further, we noted that the assignment of author- and index-supplied keywords was variable and inconsistent and speculate that this could create challenges to conducting comprehensive literature searches. Recommendations to address this include establishing standard keyword assignment criteria and proposing new index-supplied keywords to improve accessibility of research findings. These changes will be important for bringing visibility of this literature to our community, institutional leaders, national trainee organizations, and funding agencies.

Paul Russell: the transcendentalist surgeon of America

I first met Dr. Russell in the Fall of 2000 at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). I entered the Russell-Round-Room which was packed with surgeons and physicians of MGH, among whom there was no shortage of self-esteem. I came across a handsome man, full of vigor and competence, standing still for nearly two hours in the corner of the room near the blackboard. He was remarkably attentive to the questions, for which he had very concise responses. He was soft-spoken with an inviting smile, and had a welcoming, modest air about him. Despite his remarkable academic achievements, he was strikingly unassuming and serene -- features likely ingrained in his very nature.

Perseverance and consistency of interest in underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty

Introduction

Underrepresented researchers face more challenges than their well-represented counterparts. Perseverance and consistency of interest are associated with career success in well-represented physicians. Therefore, we examined associations of perseverance and consistency of interest with Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), science identity, and other factors related to career success among underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional analysis of data collected from September to October 2020 among 224 underrepresented early-career researchers at 25 academic medical centers in the Building Up Trial. We used linear regression to test associations of perseverance and consistency of interest scores with CRAI, science identity, and effort/reward imbalance (ERI) scores.

Results

The cohort is 80% female, 33% non-Hispanic Black, and 34% Hispanic. The median perseverance and consistency of interest scores were 3.8 (25th-75th percentile: 3.7,4.2) and 3.7 (25th-75th percentile: 3.2, 4.0), respectively. Higher perseverance was associated with a higher CRAI score (β = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.30, 1.33, p = 0.002) and science identity (β = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.19, 0.68, p = 0.001). Higher consistency of interest was associated with a higher CRAI score (β = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.23, 0.96, p = 0.001) and higher science identity score (β = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.36, p = 0.02), while lower consistency of interest was associated with imbalance favoring effort (β = -0.22; 95% CI = -0.33, -0.11, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

We found that perseverance and consistency of interest are related to CRAI and science identity, indicating that these factors may positively influence one's decision to stay in research.

Innovating on innovation training with the Virtual Magic Wand (VMW) program: a qualitative study

To identify and solve unmet needs and bring new therapies to patients, clinicians at all levels must engage in innovation. The Magic Wand Initiative, a program based at Massachusetts General Hospital-Wellman Center for Photomedicine, created a 10-months course called the Virtual Magic Wand (VMW) program that is a curriculum that teaches the biomedical innovation pathway to dermatologists and engages them in this creative process. This study aims to identify the impact of the VMW program on participants and consider the potential benefits of an innovation curriculum. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews in which alumni of the VMW program were asked about their experiences with innovation before, during, and after the program. Using grounded theory methodology, data were analyzed using deductive coding methods. The most cited benefit of the program was the opportunity to network (n = 12, 100%)-specifically, the mentorship opportunities (n = 10, 83%) and specialty-specific peer groups (n = 9, 75%). Other benefits included a change in mindset regarding their clinical work (n = 11, 92%) and learning the process of innovation (83%). Among barriers, lack of time (n = 7, 58%), knowledge (n = 6, 50%), and resources (n = 5, 42%), were the most mentioned. All alumni interviewed have stayed engaged in the field of biomedical innovation after their completion of the VMW program. These findings show that the VMW program positively impacted the lives and careers of participants. This study identified some of the systemic reasons that deter physicians from regularly engaging in innovation and provides guidance for how to design other innovation programs and further support the advancement of medicine.

Can you hear me now? Tools for cultivating a culture of respect, value, and appreciation within pediatric hematology, oncology, and cellular therapy

The American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (ASPHO) conducted a workshop "Can you hear me now? Cultivating a culture of respect, value, and appreciation within pediatric hematology/oncology" at their annual meeting in May 2022 in hopes of exploring how the members can enhance wellness in a climate of increasing diversity. Initiatives in the past have focused on personal care, but it has been widely shown that administrative and institutional driven initiatives are essential to create an environment of wellness. In this interactive workshop, we discovered that 22% of participants felt their institution does not instill a culture of respect. We offered tools to the audience on multiple levels: graceful self-promotion, diversity and inclusion, and leadership perspective on creating a culture of respect to address the individual, local community, and top-down leadership approaches. Here, we offer a summary on the content of the workshop, and expand upon many of the discussion points that were raised during the workshop. We bring forth novel information on each topic individually from diverse points of view, specific to the field of pediatric hematology/oncology (PHO). We aim to highlight the importance of creating a diverse and respectful work environment in PHO in hopes of ensuring motivated, satisfied, and fulfilled healthcare providers who feel appreciated and valued.

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.

The US Residency Selection Process After the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Pass/Fail Change: Overview for Applicants and Educators

The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, arguably the most significant assessment in the USMLE examination series, changed from a 3-digit score to a pass/fail outcome in January 2022. Given the rapidly evolving body of literature on this subject, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the historical context and impact of this change on various stakeholders involved in residency selection. For this, relevant keyword-based searches were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus to identify relevant literature. Given the unique history of USMLE Step 1 in the US residency selection process and the score's correlation with future performance in board-certifying examinations in different specialties, this scoring change is predicted to significantly impact US Doctor of Medicine students, US Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine students, international medical graduates, and residency program directors, among others. The significance and the rationale of the pass/fail change along with the implications for both residency applicants and educators are also summarized in this paper. Although medical programs, academic institutions, and residency organizing bodies across the United States have swiftly stepped up to ensure a seamless transition and have attempted to ensure equity for all, the conversion process carries considerable uncertainty for residency applicants. For educators, the increasing number of applications conflicts with holistic application screening, leading to the expected greater use of objective measures, with USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge likely becoming the preferred screening tool in lieu of Step 1.

Burning down the house: reinventing drug discovery in psychiatry for the development of targeted therapies

Despite advances in neuroscience, limited progress has been made in developing new and better medications for psychiatric disorders. Available treatments in psychiatry rely on a few classes of drugs that have a broad spectrum of activity across disorders with limited understanding of mechanism of action. While the added value of more targeted therapies is apparent, a dearth of pathophysiologic mechanisms exists to support targeted treatments, and where mechanisms have been identified and drugs developed, results have been disappointing. Based on serendipity and early successes that led to the current drug armamentarium, a haunting legacy endures that new drugs should align with outdated and overinclusive diagnostic categories, consistent with the idea that "one size fits all". This legacy has fostered clinical trial designs focused on heterogenous populations of patients with a single diagnosis and non-specific outcome variables. Disturbingly, this approach likely contributed to missed opportunities for drugs targeting the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and now inflammation. Indeed, cause-and-effect data support the role of inflammatory processes in neurotransmitter alterations that disrupt specific neurocircuits and related behaviors. This pathway to pathology occurs across disorders and warrants clinical trial designs that enrich for patients with increased inflammation and use primary outcome variables associated with specific effects of inflammation on brain and behavior. Nevertheless, such trial designs have not been routinely employed, and results of anti-inflammatory treatments have been underwhelming. Thus, to accelerate development of targeted therapeutics including in the area of inflammation, regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical industry must embrace treatments and trials focused on pathophysiologic pathways that impact specific symptom domains in subsets of patients, agnostic to diagnosis. Moreover, closer collaboration among basic and clinical investigators is needed to apply neuroscience knowledge to reveal disease mechanisms that drive psychiatric symptoms. Together, these efforts will support targeted treatments, ultimately leading to new and better therapeutics in psychiatry.

Physician-Scientists: Fixing the Leaking Pipeline - A Scoping Review

Introduction

This scoping review was undertaken to assess the current status of physician-scientists, including the challenges associated with their enrollment and retention, measures of success, and determinants of their satisfaction, all of which contribute to the dwindling numbers of physician-scientists aptly referred to as a "leaking pipeline" of physician-scientists.

Methods

A total of 2555 research documents from three databases, viz. Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, were selected. A total of 40 documents were considered for final analysis following the 5-stage framework of Arksey and O'Malle.

Results

Medical institutions should promote and sustain enrollments by addressing various perceived parameters of success and satisfaction. The challenge of attrition due to individual, regulatory, and sociocultural considerations also needs to be addressed.

Conclusions

Medical institutions should focus on establishing well-documented career tracks with provisions for career advancement, promotion of team science, raising mentors, giving preference to students with peer-reviewed publications for post graduate (PG) admissions, and establishing a separate office for career development and guidance for physician-scientist. It is equally important to address the factors which promote retention and prevent attrition, viz. measures of success and determinants of satisfaction. Additional measures include creating a cadre of physician-scientists in government organizations, fostering collaboration of physician-scientists with incubation centers and startups, and adding additional mandatory curriculum components focused on project-based training.

A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Gender and Career Status Differences in the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Underrepresented Postdoctoral Fellows and Early-Career Faculty

PURPOSE

The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in the biomedical workforce is pronounced and those from underrepresented backgrounds encounter more challenges than their majority counterparts. The extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on early-career investigators from underrepresented backgrounds is not yet fully understood. To examine the impact of the pandemic on underrepresented early-career biomedical researchers, this study evaluated differences in productivity, research, and psychological well-being by gender and career status.

METHOD

This was a cross-sectional analysis of preintervention data, collected in September-October 2020, from 220 participants enrolled in the Building Up a Diverse Biomedical Research Workforce study. Participants were from 25 academic medical centers in the United States and were underrepresented early-career researchers. The primary outcomes were agreement on a 5-point Likert scale with pandemic impact statements (e.g., "The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted my ability to conduct research"). Thematic analysis was conducted on responses to 2 open-ended questions assessing the pandemic's impact.

RESULTS

Most participants were female (79.9%), of non-Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish origin Black/African American (33.2%) or Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish origin (34.1%), and early-career faculty (53.4%). Over half of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the COVID-19 pandemic impacted their ability to work (55.7%) and conduct research (70.7%). Themes from qualitative analysis suggested lower research productivity, concerns about the academic job market and funding, and psychological distress due to the pandemic. Women were more likely to attribute lost productivity and psychological distress to homeschooling and childcare responsibilities. Postdoctoral fellows were concerned about more competition for fewer academic positions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of early-career underrepresented biomedical researchers, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely felt by participants, varying by gender and career status. For those postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty who are underrepresented, it is critical for institutions to offer flexibility in their positions.

Perceptions of Research and Research-Oriented Careers Among College-Level Baccalaureate-MD Students in the United States

A survey was administered to describe research perceptions among college-level students in combined baccalaureate-MD (BA/MD) programs in the United States. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze participant research perceptions. The estimated response rate was 26% (430/1653). Most respondents conducted scientific research in high school and college and reported barriers to research participation. Key barriers to research participation included lack of time, research knowledge or experience, and sufficient research guidance as well as the disruptions of COVID-19. Most respondents reported that research-supporting programs were available at their institution and perceived faculty mentorship programs as the most helpful for broadening their research experience.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01619-5.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Early Career Investigators in Rheumatology: Recommendations to Address Challenges to Early Research Careers

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the careers of trainees and early career investigators (ECIs). We sought to assess how the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the Rheumatology Research Foundation (RRF) can address the needs of those pursuing research careers.

METHODS

The Committee on Research created a survey to assess the impact of COVID-19 and identify topics for the ACR and the RRF to address. In fall of 2020, we surveyed postdoctoral trainees and ECIs within 9 years of terminal training. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one percent of invitees responded to the survey (n = 365); of these, 60% were pursuing careers in academic research. Seventy-five percent of respondents in academic research career paths placed their primary projects on hold during the pandemic. The number of individuals pursuing a research career from 2020 to 2021 decreased by 5%. Respondents reported funding, caregiving, and lack of preliminary data as significant challenges. Suggested impactful interventions included increased funding, funding process reform, and expanding mentoring and networking resources.

CONCLUSION

Major stressors identified during the pandemic included increased caregiving responsibilities and difficulty obtaining data and funding, for which respondents suggested increases and changes in funding programs as well as more mentoring and networking opportunities. Based on these, the Committee on Research proposes 3 priorities: 1) flexible funding mechanisms for ECIs and additional support for those impacted by caregiving; 2) virtual and in-person programs for career development and networking; and 3) curated content relevant to building a research career available on demand.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Physician-Scientist Trainees and Faculty in the United States: A National Survey

PURPOSE

Physician-scientists have long been considered an endangered species, and their extended training pathway is vulnerable to disruptions. This study investigated the effects of COVID-19-related challenges on the personal lives, career activities, stress levels, and research productivity of physician-scientist trainees and faculty.

METHOD

The authors surveyed medical students (MS), graduate students (GS), residents/fellows (R/F), and faculty (F) using a tool distributed to 120 U.S. institutions with MD-PhD programs in April-June 2020. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare differences between groups. Machine learning was employed to select variables for multivariate logistic regression analyses aimed at identifying factors associated with stress and impaired productivity.

RESULTS

The analyses included 1,929 respondents (MS: n = 679, 35%; GS: n = 676, 35%; R/F: n = 274, 14%; F: n = 300, 16%). All cohorts reported high levels of social isolation, stress from effects of the pandemic, and negative impacts on productivity. R/F and F respondents were more likely than MS and GS respondents to report financial difficulties due to COVID-19. R/F and F respondents with a dual degree expressed more impaired productivity compared with those without a dual degree. Multivariate regression analyses identified impacted research/scholarly activities, financial difficulties, and social isolation as predictors of stress and impaired productivity for both MS and GS cohorts. For both R/F and F cohorts, impacted personal life and research productivity were associated with stress, while dual-degree status, impacted research/scholarly activities, and impacted personal life were predictors of impaired productivity. More female than male respondents reported increased demands at home.

CONCLUSIONS

This national survey of physician-scientist trainees and faculty found a high incidence of stress and impaired productivity related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the challenges faced and their consequences may improve efforts to support the physician-scientist workforce in the postpandemic period.

Early Outcomes of a New NIH Program to Support Research in Residency

The work of physician-investigators has historically led to key discoveries and developments in modern medicine, but recent decades have seen significant declines in the number of U.S. physician-investigators. One of the barriers to physicians participating in research is the lack of mentored research opportunities during clinical training, especially during residency training. In response to this identified barrier and to expand the physician-investigator workforce, the National Institutes of Health initiated the R38 program, known as Stimulating Access to Research in Residency, to support mentored research opportunities for residents. This article reports on the early outcomes of the recipients of the initial round of R38 awards, granted in 2018. Early positive outcomes include increases in the reported likelihood of resident-investigators pursuing physician-investigator careers, greater reported clarity in resident-investigators' research directions, the commitment of additional institutional resources to support the R38-awarded programs, and the approval of resident-investigators as having met training requirements for certification by multiple medical boards.

Rethinking the Physician-Scientist Pathway

Physician-scientists have the potential to generate fundamental as well as translational breakthroughs. But many trainees who intend to pursue a hybrid career in research and patient care ultimately leave one or the other behind. In this Invited Commentary, the authors draw from their experience as early-career physician-scientists to frame physician-scientist training as having 2 phases: first, learning to think like a physician-scientist; second, learning to act like a physician-scientist. These phases roughly correspond to (1) clinical training (from medical school through residency or fellowship) that incorporates research exposure, and (2) a structured period of graduated research independence once the physician-scientist has become clinically autonomous. There are many effective ways to pursue each phase; what matters most is flexibility in the first phase and sustained support in the second. Accordingly, the authors suggest many potential reforms, including at the levels of the National Institutes of Health, private funders, as well as universities and research hospitals. The authors argue that rethinking physician-scientist training to support individualized paths to an independent hybrid career can help recruit and retain physician-scientists for years to come.

The Virtual Summer Research Program: supporting future physician-scientists from underrepresented backgrounds

Introduction

Physician-scientist training programs expect applicants to have had extensive research experience prior to applying. Even at the best of times, this leaves individuals from underserved and underrepresented backgrounds at a competitive disadvantage, especially those remote from major academic centers. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated that disadvantage by closing research laboratories and suspending summer research opportunities.

Methods

The Virtual Summer Research Program (VSRP) was designed to combat this shortfall by helping participating students become better informed and better prepared for applying to MD/DO-PhD programs. 156 participants were recruited from historically black colleges and universities and from national organizations for underrepresented trainees. Participants were paired with medical school faculty members and current MD/DO-PhD students from 35 participating institutions. The program lasted for at least 4 weeks and included a short research project, interactive sessions, journal clubs, social events, and attendance at a regional American Physician Scientists Association conference.

Results

In follow-up surveys, participants reported improvements in their science-related skills and in their confidence in becoming a physician-scientist, applying to training programs, and navigating mentorship relationships. A follow-up study completed one year later indicated that participants felt they had benefited from an enhanced skill set, long-term relationships with their mentors, and connections to the physician-scientist community at large.

Discussion

The results suggest that VSRP met its primary goals, which were to provide a diverse group of trainees with mentors, provide skills and resources for MD/DO-PhD application and matriculation and to support the development of longitudinal relationships between VSRP mentees and APSA. VSRP provides an approach that can be applied at an even larger scale when the constraints caused by a global pandemic have lifted.

The impact of social unrest due to systemic racism on underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty

Introduction

Social unrest tied to racism negatively impacted half of NIH-funded extramural researchers underrepresented (UR) in science. UR early-career scientists encounter more challenges in their research careers, but the impact of social unrest due to systemic racism in this group is unclear. We used mixed methods to describe the impact of social unrest due to systemic racism on mentoring relationships, research, and psychological well-being in UR post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional analysis of data collected in September 2021-January 2022 from 144 UR early-career researchers from 25 academic medical centers in the Building Up Trial. The primary outcomes were agreement on five-point Likert scales with social unrest impact statements (e.g., "I experienced psychological distress due to events of social unrest regarding systemic racism"). Thematic analysis was conducted on responses to one open-ended question assessing how social unrest regarding systemic racism affected participants.

Results

Most participants were female (80%), non-Hispanic Black (35%), or Hispanic (40%). Over half of participants (57%) experienced psychological distress as a result of social unrest due to systemic racism. Participants described direct and indirect discrimination and isolation from other persons of color at their institutions. Twice as many participants felt their mentoring relationships were positively (21%) versus negatively (11%) impacted by social unrest due to systemic racism.

Conclusions

Experiences with racial bias and discrimination impact the career and well-being of UR early-career researchers. Mentoring relationships and institutional support play an important role in buffering the negative impact of racial injustice for this population.

The Drug Abuse Research Training (DART) Program for Psychiatry Residents and Summer Fellows: 15-Year Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To increase the number of physician-scientists in research, the Drug Abuse Research Training (DART) program at the Medical University of South Carolina offers a 2-year research track for psychiatry residents and a 10-week summer fellowship for students. The goal of this study was to examine program outcomes and alumni diversity levels over DART's 15-year history.

METHODS

To date, 215 trainees (44 residents, 171 summer fellows) have completed the program. An anonymous online survey was sent to the 143 program alumni with valid contact information. Survey data included demographic characteristics, post-program research involvement, and self-reported barriers to continued research engagement.

RESULTS

Overall survey completion response was 83.5% (N = 122). The alumni included 59.0% women, and 36.1% of respondents identified as a member of a minority racial/ethnic group. Following program completion, 77.0% of the alumni reported continued research involvement. More than half of the alumni reported scientific publications (57.4%) and conference presentations (63.1%) since completing DART. Among respondents who did not subsequently engage in research, the most common modifiable barriers included difficulty finding a mentor, self-perceived deficits in statistical skills and research methodology, and overall lack of confidence in research ability.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 15 years, the DART program has established a diverse research training program that now spans the educational spectrum from undergraduate to residency training. Future program goals include additional training to address self-reported modifiable research barriers. This program provides a model for other training programs designed to cultivate research interests and promote the diversity of clinical researchers.

Research involvement among undergraduate health profession students in a resource-limited setting: awareness, attitude, motivators and barriers

BACKGROUND

Involvement of undergraduate health professions students (HPS) in research will facilitate evidence-based clinical practice among future healthcare practitioners. This study aimed to assess research involvement among undergraduate HPS students and associated factors in Uganda.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online assessment tool sent through WhatsApp groups and E-mail addresses of HPS in 12 medical schools in Uganda between 20th September and 5th October 2021.

RESULTS

We enrolled 398 participants with a mean age of 23.9 ± 3.7 years. Of this, 267 (67.1%) were male. One hundred twenty (30.2%) participants previously participated in a research activity: 90 (58.4%) as research assistants, 39 (25.3%) published as first authors, and 25 (16.2%) as co-authors. Training on the conduct of research was received by 242 (65.8%) participants, and 326 (81.9%) had intentions of conducting research in the future. Factors influencing participation in research activities were, age ≥ 25 years (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.9, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.2-3.2, p = 0.012), being male (aOR: 2.1, 95%CI: 1.2-3.6, p = 0.008), and being in a clinical year i.e., year 3 (aOR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.1-9.3, p = 0.033), year 4 (aOR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.1-9.5, p = 0.028) and year 5(aOR: 11.6, 95% CI: 3.2-42.1, p < 0.001). Lack of funds (79.6%), and mentorship (63.3%) were reported as major barriers to research.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high proportion of HPS showing interest in getting involved in research, less than one-third reported previous involvement. Addressing barriers such as funding could potentially improve research involvement and output among undergraduate HPS in resource-limited settings.

Assessing publication rates from medical students' mandatory research projects in the Netherlands: a follow-up study of 10 cohorts of medical students

OBJECTIVES

The medical field is facing a clinician-scientist shortage. Medical schools could foster the clinician-scientist workforce by offering students research opportunities. Most medical schools offer elective research programmes. Subsequently, a subset of doctors graduates without any research experience. Mandatory research projects may be more sufficient to develop clinician-scientist, but take more supervision and curricular time. There is limited insight in the scientific outcomes of mandatory research experiences. This study aims to examine publication rates of a mandatory research experience, identify factors associated with publication, and includes postgraduate research engagement.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective follow-up study involving 10 cohorts of medical students' mandatory research projects from Leiden University Medical Center.

PARTICIPANTS

All medical students who conducted their research project between 2008 and 2018 (n=2329) were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Publication rates were defined as peer-reviewed scientific publications, including research papers, reviews, and published meeting abstracts. Postgraduate research engagement was defined as research participation and dissemination of research at scientific conferences or in journals.

RESULTS

In total, 644 (27.7%) of all mandatory research experiences resulted in publication, with students mainly as first (n=984, 42.5%) or second author (n=587, 25.3%) and above world average citation impact (mean normalised journal score 1.29, mean normalised citation score 1.23). Students who conducted their research in an academic centre (adjusted OR 2.82; 95% CI 2.10 to 3.77), extended their research (adjusted OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.20), were involved in an excellency track (adjusted OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.44 to 3.01), or conducted clinical (adjusted OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.15 to 3.74) or laboratory (adjusted OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.16 to 4.01) research published their research more often. Later as junior doctors, this group significantly more often disseminate their research results at scientific conferences (adjusted OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.23) or in journals (adjusted OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.14 to 3.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that a significant subset of hands-on mandatory research projects with flexible learning pathways result in tangible research output with proper impact and that such successful experiences can be considered as diving board towards a research-oriented career.

Essentials of neonatal-perinatal medicine fellowship: scholarship perspective

Neonatal-perinatal medicine fellows must achieve a meaningful accomplishment in scholarly activity as part of their training. Despite the requirement for scholarly training in fellowship, there is a vanishingly small number of MD-only physician-scientists pursuing a research-oriented career. Recent neonatal trainees have identified several factors that preclude their careers in research-focused academic neonatology, including lower pay in academic positions, inadequate training in research techniques, and the perception that individuals in research careers have a poor work-life balance. High competition for limited pediatric research funds also contributes to a diminishing pool of physician-scientists in neonatology. This small number of physician-scientists is threatened by a high rate of attrition among physicians who enter this career path. In order to prevent further declines in the number of neonatal physician-scientists, we need improvements in funding and strong intra- and cross-institutional mentorship to foster individuals interested in a career as a physician-scientist.

Strategies for Achieving Gender Equity and Work-Life Integration in Physician-Scientist Training

Substantial gender inequities persist across academic medicine. These issues are not new: Recent evidence still points to a chilly climate for women in academic medicine, including those in physician-scientist training. The discussion for how to address gender equity and issues of work-life integration typically centers around faculty and rarely includes trainees. The authors delineate specific strategies to address gender inequity in physician-scientist training by identifying key stakeholders for implementation and proposing areas to integrate these strategies with current training timelines. Strategies discussed include multiple-role mentoring, allyship training for trainees and faculty, early implementation of professional development sessions, incorporation of childcare and family-friendly policies, and additional policies for funding bodies to prioritize gender equity practices. The goal of this article is to equip trainees and the academic community with proactive strategies to create a more equitable environment for future generations of trainees in academic medicine.

Physician-scientists in the United States at 2020: Trends and concerns

Physician‐scientists comprise a unique and valuable part of the biomedical workforce, but for decades there has been concern about the number of physicians actively engaged in research. Reports have outlined the challenges facing physician‐scientists, and programs have been initiated to encourage and facilitate research careers for medically trained scientists. Many of these initiatives have demonstrated successful outcomes, but there has not been a recent summary of the impact of the past decade of effort. This report compiles available data from surveys of medical education and physician research participation to assess changes in the physician‐scientist workforce from 2011–2020. Several trends are positive: rising enrollments in MD‐PhD programs, greater levels of interest in research careers among matriculating medical students, more research experience during medical school and rising numbers of physicians in academic medicine, and an increase in first R01 grants to physician‐scientists. However, there are now decreased levels of interest in research careers among graduating medical students, a steady decline in MDs applying for NIH loan repayment program support, an increased age at first R01 grant success for physicians, and fewer physicians reporting research as their primary work activity: all of these indicators create concern for the stability of the career path. Despite a recommendation by the Physician‐Scientist Workforce in 2014 to create “real‐time” reporting on NIH grants and grantees to help the public assess trends, this initiative has not been completed. Better information is still needed to fully understand the status of the physician‐scientist workforce, and to assess efforts to stabilize this vulnerable career path.

Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success

MD-PhD trainees constitute an important source of physician-scientists. Persistence on this challenging path is facilitated by success in garnering independent (R grant) support from the NIH. Published research tracks academic appointments and global R01 success for MD-PhD trainees but has not included information on future funding success of individual MD-PhD predoctoral grant holders. Here, we used data from the NIH RePORTER database to identify and track the funding trajectory of physician-scientists who received predoctoral grant support through the F30 mechanism, which is specific for dual-degree candidates. Male and female F30 awardees did not differ in their success in garnering K (postdoctoral training) grants, but, among F30 grant awardees, men were 2.6 times more likely than women to receive R funding. These results underscore the need for analysis of factors that contribute to the disproportionate loss of NIH-supported female physician-scientists between the predoctoral F30 and the independent R grant-supported stages.

Gaps between college and starting an MD-PhD program are adding years to physician-scientist training time

The average age when physician-scientists begin their career has been rising. Here, we focused on one contributor to this change: the increasingly common decision by candidates to postpone applying to MD-PhD programs until after college. This creates a time gap between college and medical school. Data were obtained from 3544 trainees in 73 programs, 72 program directors, and AAMC databases. From 2013 to 2020, the prevalence of gaps rose from 53% to 75%, with the time usually spent doing research. Gap prevalence for MD students also increased but not to the same extent and for different reasons. Differences by gender, underrepresented status, and program size were minimal. Most candidates who took a gap did so because they believed it would improve their chances of admission, but gaps were as common among those not accepted to MD-PhD programs as among those who were. Many program directors preferred candidates with gaps, believing without evidence that gaps reflects greater commitment. Although candidates with gaps were more likely to have a publication at the time of admission, gaps were not associated with a shorter time to degree nor have they been shown to improve outcomes. Together, these observations raise concerns that, by promoting gaps after college, current admissions practices have had unintended consequences without commensurate advantages.

Challenges of senior 8-year-program medical students' scientific research in China: A multicenter questionnaire-based study

Among the diverse medical education systems in China, the 8-year program is dedicated to cultivating physician scientists. Although the research ability of senior students in 8-year medical programs is a pivotal quality, it remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the current status and challenges of students' research experience, abilities, and outputs.A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted in 5 medical schools in northern China. Electronic questionnaires were sent to 235 randomly chosen fifth-grade or sixth-grade 8-year-program medical students. A total of 211 responses were collected and analyzed using SPSS 22.0.Only 13.3% of participants chose research as their future career goal. Students generally felt that conducting research was stressful and difficult. The greatest obstacle was a lack of time due to heavy workloads. The 2 major motivations for research were graduation and/or future employment (75.8%) and research interest (24.2%). More than half of the students (142, 67.3%) had research experience by the time of the survey, among whom 84 students already had research outputs. A higher proportion of students with outputs was motivated by the requirements for graduation or employment compared to students without outputs (71.4% vs 55.2%, P  =  .046).Senior 8-year-program medical students in China generally had high pressure to conduct research and devoted their efforts to overcome these challenges. More guidance and novel encouragement to enhance students' initiative and interest in research could be provided by medical schools and educators in the future.

Factors Influencing Scientific Achievements of Medical Students in the Anatomy Research Group: An Analysis From the Autonomous University of Nuevo León in Mexico

Scientific research and student involvement are critical to the formation of physicians, yet the number of medical researchers has decreased over time. To implement corrective strategies, the variables associated with positive research attitudes and productivity among medical students must be identified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the variables associated with students interested or involved in research. A validated questionnaire was applied to the student members of an established anatomy research group in a Mexican medical school with a six-year medical program. Data were collected and analyzed. A total of 85.5% (n = 77/90) students answered the survey with most respondents being second-year medical students. The majority of respondents indicated that the important component of conducting research was a contribution to the new knowledge (45.5%) and to the scientific community (42.9%). More than half of respondents mentioned a professor or a peer as the initial motivation to become involved in research. Lack of time was the main limitation (59.7%) to research involvement. Perceived benefits were knowledge and team work skills. Of those involved, most (85.7%) wished to continue participating in research as a complement to their clinical work. Professors and student colleagues were found to play an important motivational and recruitment role for medical research. These efforts in turn have developed into long-lasting mentor-mentee relationships. Students also anticipated that early involvement in research will positively influence the likelihood of future physicians' contribution and collaboration in research.

Training Physician‒Scientists for Careers in Investigative Dermatology

Physician‒scientists have made countless discoveries, and their dwindling numbers are a significant concern. Although dermatology has become an increasingly popular destination for physician‒scientist trainees, the proportion of trainees who pursue scientific research careers after training is among the lowest of all medical specialties. To investigate this problem, we surveyed a national cohort of dermatology educators, physician‒scientist track program directors, and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases T32 directors for opinions regarding physician‒scientist training in dermatology. On the basis of these findings and to help address the issue, we propose a training practicum and provide a resource for funding opportunities to help guide trainees and institutions interested in supporting investigative dermatologists. We also discuss the important roles of department chairs and institutions in fashioning an environment conducive to physician‒scientist training. The information and recommendations provided in this paper may help to improve the recruitment, training, development, and retention of investigative dermatologists and future leaders in this field.

Training and Retaining Physician‒Scientists in Dermatology in Taiwan

Currently, only 14.7% of practicing dermatologists in Taiwan who work at medical centers are dedicated to innovative research. Dermatology departments appear to face steeper challenges with the recruitment and retention of physician‒scientists than other medical specialties. The need to increase the number of physician‒scientists is clear and can be achieved through the provision of good training programs, financial support, early mentorship, and sustained funding.

Beyond the Scalpel: Attracting and Nurturing Surgeon-Scientists in Plastic Surgery

SUMMARY

With plastic surgery being at the forefront of innovation and discovery in multiple research disciplines, plastic surgery is poised for M.D./Ph.D. and research-focused M.D. trainees to be attracted to this field. Surprisingly, recent reports have shown that the number of surgeon-scientists pursuing research is on the decline, with these declines being even more pronounced within plastic surgery. It is essential that plastic surgery remains a leader in translational research by cultivating a group of individuals who have been trained in basic research and are thereby competitive to obtain extramural grant funding. To address this need, the authors review data elucidating why the research-oriented trainee may forego pursuing a career in plastic surgery. Although much of the existing literature is speculative, the authors identified the current number of M.D./Ph.D.s in plastic surgery using data obtained from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and investigated number of grants in plastic surgery compared to other medical and surgical fields using the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results. The authors hypothesize that economic constraints and difficulty securing protected research time may be contributing to fewer trainees pursuing plastic surgery. The purpose of this article is (1) to discuss potential reasons deterring research-oriented trainees from pursuing careers as surgeon-scientists within plastic surgery; (2) to propose solutions that may attract more trainees interested in careers as surgeon-scientists to the field of plastic surgery; (3) to highlight the lack of quantitative data regarding surgeon-scientist training in plastic surgery; and (4) to propose and encourage future research avenues to help attract and nurture surgeon-scientists in plastic surgery.

Recruiting underrepresented individuals in a double pandemic: Lessons learned in a randomized control trial

The Building Up Trial is a cluster-randomized trial that aims to address the issue of the leaky career pathway for underrepresented (UR) faculty in biomedical fields. Regulatory approval and recruitment for the Building Up Trial took place during the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-racism movement. The pandemic and anti-racism movement personally and professionally impacted the target population and made recruitment challenging at both the institution and participant level. The target sample size for this study was 208 postdoctoral fellows or early-career faculty across 26 predominately white institutions. Challenges and adaptations are described. The Building Up Trial was delayed by 3 months. In total, 225 participants from 26 institutions were enrolled. Participants are predominately female (80%), Hispanic/Latinx (34%) or non-Hispanic/Latinx Black (33%), and early-career faculty (53%). At the institution level, obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval through a single Institutional Review Board (sIRB) posed the biggest challenge. We adapted to COVID-19-related challenges through simplifying sIRB forms, modifying study practices, and increasing communication with institutions. Recruiting UR postdoctoral fellows and faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic and anti-racism movement was challenging but not impossible. Studies should be prepared to modify study and recruitment policies to overcome additional barriers posed by the pandemics.