The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on underrepresented early-career PhD and physician scientists.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Doyle JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8545843 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has created significant stressors for the academic and scientific community, with unique challenges for early-career physician-scientists. The pandemic-related disruptions have significantly affected research productivity, access to mentoring, professional development and networking opportunities, funding, and personal wellness. This is especially true for pulmonary and critical care medicine faculty because of the burden of specialized clinical care responsibilities that the COVID-19 pandemic has demanded. Departmental, institutional, and national leadership should foster open dialogue to identify and mitigate these challenges to promote ongoing career development of early-career physician-scientists. Implementation of thoughtful interventions to address these challenges will provide essential support for junior faculty and help retain a generation of physician-scientists.
| S-EPMC8043276 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC9696762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The training of PhD students and early-career scientists is largely an apprenticeship in which the trainee associates with an expert to become an independent scientist. But when is a PhD student ready to graduate, a postdoctoral scholar ready for an independent position, or an early-career scientist ready for advanced responsibilities? Research training by apprenticeship does not uniformly include a framework to assess if the trainee is equipped with the complex knowledge, skills and attitudes required to be a successful scientist in the 21st century. To address this problem, we propose competency-based assessment throughout the continuum of training to evaluate more objectively the development of PhD students and early-career scientists.
| S-EPMC6002247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early research on the impact of COVID-19 on academic scientists suggests that disruptions to research, teaching, and daily work life are not experienced equally. However, this work has overwhelmingly focused on experiences of women and parents, with limited attention to the disproportionate impact on academic work by race, disability status, sexual identity, first-generation status, and academic career stage. Using a stratified random survey sample of early-career academics in four science disciplines (N = 3,277), we investigated socio-demographic and career stage differences in the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic along seven work outcomes: changes in four work areas (research progress, workload, concern about career advancement, support from mentors) and work disruptions due to three COVID-19 related life challenges (physical health, mental health, and caretaking). Our analyses examined patterns across career stages as well as separately for doctoral students and for postdocs/assistant professors. Overall, our results indicate that scientists from marginalized (i.e., devalued) and minoritized (i.e., underrepresented) groups across early career stages reported more negative work outcomes as a result of COVID-19. However, there were notable patterns of differences depending on the socio-demographic identities examined. Those with a physical or mental disability were negatively impacted on all seven work outcomes. Women, primary caregivers, underrepresented racial minorities, sexual minorities, and first-generation scholars reported more negative experiences across several outcomes such as increased disruptions due to physical health symptoms and additional caretaking compared to more privileged counterparts. Doctoral students reported more work disruptions from life challenges than other early-career scholars, especially those related to health problems, while assistant professors reported more negative changes in areas such as decreased research progress and increased workload. These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately harmed work outcomes for minoritized and marginalized early-career scholars. Institutional interventions are required to address these inequalities in an effort to retain diverse cohorts in academic science.
| S-EPMC9469975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted autism research and services. Early career researchers (ECRs) are particularly vulnerable to the impact of the pandemic on job security and career development. The goal of this study was to capture the challenges ECRs are facing during the pandemic and the supports that are needed for career development and research. ECRs were invited to complete an online survey that focused on four major areas; the impact of COVID-19 on their research; changes in productivity due to COVID-19; changes to training due to COVID-19; and current mental health. 150 ECRs were eligible and provided sufficient data for inclusion. All but one ECRs reported their research had been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Reductions in productivity were reported by 85% of ECRs. The biggest impacts included recruitment of participants, increased needs at home and personal mental health. ECRs reported a 3-fold increase in burnout, as well as increased anxiety. ECR supports, such as funding, flexibility, and tenure extensions, are required to ensure ASD research does not suffer from a "lost generation" of researchers. LAY SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has had negative impacts on research around the world. Loss of productivity impedes autism research discoveries. However, researchers in the earliest phases of their career, specifically postdoctoral fellows through individuals in assistant professor (or equivalent) positions, are particularly vulnerable to long-lasting effects of pandemic-related disruptions which may limit their ability to continue as autism researchers. This survey highlights the needs of this group and identifies mechanisms by which these early career researchers may be supported in this time. This is critical to ensure the next generation of ASD researchers and clinician scientists continue on the path to advancing understanding of autism in the decades to come.
| S-EPMC8250334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe World Health Organization recognizes dementia as a public health priority and highlights research as an action to respond to the consequences, with early career dementia researchers (ECDRs) representing the key driving force. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, biomedical and psychosocial dementia research was strained worldwide. The aim of this study was to understand the impact of the pandemic on ECDRs.MethodsIn autumn 2021, the Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Professional Interest Area to Elevate Early Career Researchers (PEERs) and University College London conducted an online survey querying ECDRs' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was shared through the ISTAART network, social media, podcasts, and emailing lists. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.ResultsSurvey data from n = 321 ECDRs from 34 countries were analyzed (67.6% women; 78.8% working in academia). Overall, 77.8% of ECDRs surveyed indicated research delays, 53.9% made project adjustments, 37.9% required additional or extended funding, and 41.8% reported a negative impact on career progression. Moreover, 19.9% felt unsupported by their institutions and employers (33% felt well supported, 42.7% somewhat supported). ECDR's conference attendance remained the same (26.5%) or increased (More: 28.6%; a lot more: 5.6%) since the start of the pandemic. Continental differences were visible, while the impact of the pandemic did not differ greatly based on ECDRs' sociodemographic characteristics.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial impact on ECDRs worldwide and institutions, employers, and funding bodies are urged to consider the implications and lessons-learned when working with, managing, and promoting ECDRs. Strategies related to the pandemic and general career support to improve ECDRs career progression are discussed, including social media training, digital networking, and benefits of hybrid events. Global resources specific for ECDRs are highlighted.
| S-EPMC9645634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecently, there have been concerted efforts to improve racial and ethnic diversity in the physician-scientist workforce. Identifying factors associated with career choices among those underrepresented in medicine and science is a necessary first step to advance this objective. The aim of the present study was to assess the attitudes and factors associated with academic and research career interests among underrepresented predoctoral physician-scientists.MethodsA cross-sectional 70-question survey was distributed to all predoctoral single degree (MD or DO) and dual degree (MD/PhD or DO/PhD) trainees at 32 medical schools in the United States from 2012 to 2014. Main outcomes included factors important to advancement in academic medicine, intended medical specialty, and future career plans. To test the post-hoc hypothesis of whether trainees from underrepresented groups have differing perceptions of career trajectories and obstacles than their counterparts, we evaluated responses according to self-identified race/ethnic status using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. All tests were two-sided and significance level of < 0.05 was used.ResultsThere were a total of 4433 responses representing all predoctoral training stages. The response rate was 27%. Most respondents were single degree trainees (MD/DO 79% vs MD/DO-PhD 21%). Most respondents self-identified as White (67%), followed by Multi-racial or Other (14.3%), Asian or Pacific Islander (10.4%), Hispanic (6%), and Black or African American (4.1%). Desired career sector, career intention, and clinical specialty interest differed across race/ethnic groups. With respect to career selection factors, anticipated non-work related responsibilities during residency were also significantly different between these groups. By multivariable regression analysis, Black or African American trainees were significantly less likely than White trainees to indicate a career in academia (OR 0.496, 95% CI 0.322-0.764) and basic research (OR 0.314, 95% CI 0.115-0.857), while Multi-racial or Other trainees were also less likely than White trainees to indicate a career in academia (OR 0.763, 95% CI 0.594-0.980).ConclusionsThese data represent the first in-depth survey of career aspirations, perceptions, and interests between demographically underrepresented and non-underrepresented predoctoral physician-scientist trainees. Our results identify key differences between these cohorts, which may guide efforts to improve diversity within the physician-scientist workforce.
| S-EPMC7656762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHIV prevention interventions which support engagement in care and increased awareness of biomedical options, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), are highly desired for disproportionately affected Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx and gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) populations in the United States (US). However, in almost 40 years of HIV research, few interventions have been developed directly by and for these priority populations in domestic counties most at risk. We submit that interventions developed by early-career scientists who identify with and work directly with affected subgroups, and which include social and structural determinants of health, are vital as culturally tailored HIV prevention and care tools.MethodsWe reviewed and summarized interventions developed from 2007 to 2020 by historically underrepresented early-career HIV prevention scientists in a federally funded research mentoring program. We mapped these interventions to determine which were in jurisdictions deemed as high priority (based on HIV burden) by national prevention strategies.ResultsWe summarized 11 HIV interventions; 10 (91%) of the 11 interventions are in geographic areas where HIV disparities are most concentrated and where new HIV prevention and care activities are focused. Each intervention addresses critical social and structural determinants of health disparities, and successfully reaches priority populations.ConclusionFocused funding that supports historically underrepresented scientists and their HIV prevention and care intervention research can help facilitate reaching national goals to reduce HIV-related disparities and end the HIV epidemic. Maintaining these funding streams should remain a priority as one of the tools for national HIV prevention.
| S-EPMC7598237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: To reverse the dramatic decline in the U.S. physician-scientist workforce, interventions are necessary to retain physicians in research careers.Objective: To evaluate the impact of an annual 3-day symposium, the Respiratory Disease Young Investigators' Forum (RDYIF), designed to guide fellows and junior faculty into successful physician-scientist careers.Methods: In this retrospective, observational study, a questionnaire was e-mailed to 308 physicians who participated in the RDYIF between 2005 and 2018. The questionnaire was administered by National Jewish Health study personnel in the spring of 2019. Responses were primarily analyzed using descriptive and qualitative approaches.Results: The response rate was 39.3% (n = 121), with 107 of responders (88.4%) completing the full survey. The majority of survey completers currently worked as physician-scientists (76.6%; n = 82), held faculty positions (88.8%; n = 95) in an academic center (90.6%; n = 97), and were currently involved in research (93.4%; n = 100). The majority had been an author on ≥10 peer-reviewed publications (61.3%, n = 65) and had been awarded research grants (71.7%; n = 76). Thirty completers (28.3%) had served as a principal investigator on one or more clinical trials. Completers indicated that participation in the RDYIF had a "strong impact" or "very strong impact" on their career development as physician-scientists.Conclusion: Participation in the RDYIF strengthened participants' interest in physician-scientist careers and appeared to track with successful career development. Young Investigator Forums such as the RDYIF may be an effective intervention to support the declining supply of physician-scientists in North America.
| S-EPMC8043310 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8785523 | biostudies-literature