Impact of a Pandemic on Early Career Women.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nobleza COS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8785523 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Setbacks are an integral part of a scientific career, yet little is known about their long-term effects. Here we examine junior scientists applying for National Institutes of Health R01 grants. By focusing on proposals fell just below and just above the funding threshold, we compare near-miss with narrow-win applicants, and find that an early-career setback has powerful, opposing effects. On the one hand, it significantly increases attrition, predicting more than a 10% chance of disappearing permanently from the NIH system. Yet, despite an early setback, individuals with near misses systematically outperform those with narrow wins in the longer run. Moreover, this performance advantage seems to go beyond a screening mechanism, suggesting early-career setback appears to cause a performance improvement among those who persevere. Overall, these findings are consistent with the concept that "what doesn't kill me makes me stronger," which may have broad implications for identifying, training and nurturing junior scientists.
| S-EPMC6773762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe main objective of this study was to report stress and anxiety levels during the COVID-19 pandemic on early- to mid-career women researchers in healthcare sciences research and determine the associated factors.MethodsA 50-item self-administered internet questionnaire was developed using a mix of Likert-type scales and open-ended response questions. The survey was distributed June 10-August 3, 2020. Anxiety and stress as well as personal/family demands were assessed through validated measures (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-Anxiety Short Form and Perceived Stress Scale [PSS]) and open-ended responses.ResultsOne hundred and fifty-one early-career women in healthcare sciences research completed the survey; mean respondent age was 37.3 ± 5.2 years; and all had a college degree or higher, 50.3% holding a PhD and 35.8% MD. Race and ethnicity were reported in 128; the majority were White (74.0%). One-third (31.2%) reported being "very much" concerned about reaching their research productivity goals and 30.1% were "very much" concerned about academic promotion and tenure. Fifty percent reported a "moderate" PROMIS anxiety score and 72.1% reported a "moderate" PSS score. For the open-ended responses, 65.6% reported a worry about their professional goals because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Major concerns revolved around finances, childcare, and job security.ConclusionsThroughout the pandemic, early- and mid-career women in healthcare sciences research have reported moderate to high overall stress, anxiety, and worries. These concerns appear related to household settings, additional responsibilities, financial concerns, and reduced research productivity. Institutions and funding agencies should take these concerns into consideration and offer support.
| S-EPMC9393575 | 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:Underrepresented minorities have higher attrition from the professoriate and have experienced greater negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of COVID-19 on the lives of 196 early-career physician-scientists versus PhD researchers who are underrepresented in biomedical research. Participants in the Building Up study answered questions on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their personal and professional lives, and a mixed-methods approach was used to conduct the analysis. While most participants experienced increases in overall stress (72% of PhD researchers vs 76% of physician-scientists), physician-scientists reported that increased clinical demands, research delays, and the potential to expose family members to SARS-CoV-2 caused psychological distress, specifically. PhD researchers, more than physician-scientists, reported increased productivity (27% vs 9%), schedule flexibilities (49% vs 25%), and more quality time with friends and family (40% vs 24%). Future studies should consider assessing the effectiveness of programs addressing COVID-19-related challenges experienced by PhD researchers and physician-scientists, particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds.
| S-EPMC8545843 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAs part of the Harbnger-2 project, this study aimed to discover the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on junior researchers' work-life, career prospects, research and publishing practices and networking.MethodsAn online international survey of 800 early career researchers (ECRs) was conducted in 2022. A questionnaire was developed based on three rounds of interviews and distributed using multiple channels including publishers, social media, and direct email to ECRs.ResultsThe impact of the pandemic on career prospects, morale, job security, productivity, ability to network and collaborate, and quality and speed of peer review has on the whole been more negative than positive. A quarter of ECRs shifted their research focus to pandemic-related topics and half of those who did, benefited largely due to increased productivity and impact. The majority worked remotely/from home and more than two-thirds of those who did so benefitted from it. While virtual or hybrid conferences have been embraced by the majority of ECRs, around a third still preferred face-to-face only conferences. The use of library online platforms, Sci-Hub, ResearchGate, Google Scholar and smartphone to search and access full-text papers increased. ECRs prioritised journals with fast submission procedures for the publishing of their papers and spent more time on increasing the visibility of their research. Fees were a problem for publishing open access.ConclusionAlthough, generally, the pandemic negatively impacted many aspects of ECRs' work-life, certain research areas and individuals benefited from being more appreciated and valued, and, in some cases, resulted in increased resources, better productivity and greater impact. Changes, such as the use of digital technologies and remote working created new opportunities for some ECRs. While continuing work flexibility and hybrid conferences might benefit some ECRs, institutions should also take measures to help those ECRs whose career and productivity have been adversely impacted.
| S-EPMC9931124 | 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 COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected older adults and brought about unprecedented challenges to geriatricians. We aimed to evaluate the experiences of early career geriatricians (residents or consultants with up to 10 years of experience) throughout Europe using an online survey. We obtained 721 responses. Most of the respondents were females (77.8%) and residents in geriatric medicine (54.6%). The majority (91.4%) were directly involved in the care of patients with COVID-19. The respondents reported moderate levels of anxiety and feelings of being overloaded with work. The anxiety levels were higher in women than in men. Most of the respondents experienced a feeling of a strong restriction on their private lives and a change in their work routine. The residents also reported a moderate disruption in their training and research activities. In conclusion, early career geriatricians experienced a major impact of COVID-19 on their professional and private lives.
| S-EPMC8799436 | biostudies-literature
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:BackgroundFor more than two decades, national career development programs (CDPs) have addressed underrepresentation of women faculty in academic medicine through career and leadership curricula. We evaluated CDP participation impact on retention.MethodsWe used Association of American Medical Colleges data to compare 3268 women attending CDPs from 1988 to 2008 with 17,834 women and 40,319 men nonparticipant faculty similar to CDP participants in degree, academic rank, first year of appointment in rank, and home institution. Measuring from first year in rank to departure from last position held or December 2009 (study end date), we used Kaplan-Meier curves; Cox survival analysis adjusted for age, degree, tenure, and department; and 10-year rates to compare retention.ResultsCDP participants were significantly less likely to leave academic medicine than their peers for up to 8 years after appointment as Assistant and Associate Professors. Full Professor participants were significantly less likely to leave than non-CDP women. Men left less often than non-CDP women at every rank. Participants attending more than one CDP left less often than those attending one, but results varied by rank. Patterns of switching institutions after 10 years varied by rank; CDP participants switched significantly less often than men at Assistant and Associate Professor levels and significantly less often than non-CDP women among Assistant Professors. Full Professors switched at equal rates.ConclusionNational CDPs appear to offer retention advantage to women faculty, with implications for faculty performance and capacity building within academic medicine. Intervals of retention advantage for CDP participants suggest vulnerable periods for intervention.
| S-EPMC4939381 | biostudies-literature