Helping Everyone Achieve a LifeTime of Health - Future Addiction Scientist Training Program Outcomes.

Lack of federal funding for health research explicitly referencing diverse communities has led to systematic underinvestment in efforts addressing the diverse needs of underresearched populations. This report presents an overview of the Center for the Study of Asian American Health at NYU Langone (CSAAH) Pilot Project Program, which aims to eliminate health disparities and advance health equity among Asian American populations. Established in 2003, CSAAH mentors early-stage investigators (ESIs) in performing research that builds on connections with community partners for health disparity populations. A central feature is the annual CSAAH Pilot Project Program, which mentors ESIs in health disparities research and independent funding. The program aims to increase the number of ESIs conducting health disparities research using rigorous, community-engaged, transdisciplinary approaches. This report describes the CSAAH Pilot Project Program's operations and evaluates mentee progress across 6 award cycles from September 2017 to June 2024. Across 6 cycles (2017-2024), CSAAH supported 45 projects: 21 by postdoctoral fellows and 24 by junior faculty. Through May 2024, awardees reported receiving 67 grant awards after their pilot funding (totaling >$15.5 million), publishing 803 articles, and receiving 20 career promotions. The program was positively received by awardees and perceived to be beneficial to their careers, with most respondents (>90%) reporting that the mentored research experience improved their capacity for collaborations and knowledge and use of equity-focused methods, provided opportunities to expand their research networks, and supported their career intentions to seek and obtain external funding. Planned refinements to the program seek to decentralize learning through multilevel mentorship and sustained engagement across past awardees and the faculty and mentorship teams by matching future awardees by self-identified content areas to senior faculty and "near-peer" ESI mentors and continuing annual follow-up through evaluation survey outreach and hosting dedicated, regular touchpoints with program alumni.

The Comprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) initiative of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) supports long-standing collaborations between an under-resourced institution and NCI-designated Cancer Centers to strengthen cancer research workforce and advance cancer research capacity. One of the longest continuously funded CPACHE programs is the Morehouse School of Medicine/Tuskegee University/University of Alabama at Birmingham O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center tri-institutional partnership. A central component of this partnership is training future generations of investigators, which is accomplished through the research education programs that are designed to build cancer research skills, enhance mentorship, and support career development for all levels from high school students to Early-Stage Investigators (ESIs). This paper evaluates the longitudinal impact of a year-long program for ESIs and postdoctoral fellows since its inception in 2007. The data were extracted from the Research Education Core administrative records about the scholars and mentors and utilized publicly accessible databases Scopus and PubMed for publications, and the NIH RePORTER for grants. Among 89 program scholars, nearly 95% had at least one publication since their program start date. Of these, 70% had a first author, and 62% had a senior author publication. Approximately 20% of scholars obtained NIH funding as principal investigators through grants, core leadership, and/or supplements. This tri-institutional program successfully attracted investigators committed to cancer research. The outcomes suggest that structured training, intensive mentorship, and cross-institutional collaboration can meaningfully support their academic careers. These findings provide insights for strengthening similar programs to continue to meet the evolving professional needs for the development of ESIs and postdoctoral fellows, particularly at under-resourced institutions.

The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which an online module influenced honours students’ attitude towards research, research self-efficacy and knowledge of research. An availability sample (N= 279) of postgraduate students enrolled for an online course in research methodology (n = 97 for semester 1 in 2012 and n = 182 for semester 2 in 2012) was used. The attitude towards research scale, self-developed research self-efficacy and knowledge test was administered in a single group pre-test post-test design. Dependent t-tests revealed that in general, students’ positive attitude towards research, their research self-efficacy and knowledge of research increased from the onset to the completion of the module. However, students’ perception of the usefulness of research for their careers declined and their research anxiety and self-efficacy with regard to data analysis remained unchanged on completion of the module. These findings indicate that addressing students’ perception of the usefulness of research for their careers and their research anxiety may be more complex than anticipated and that it could be a process that is independent of addressing students’ research self-efficacy and their knowledge of research.

Background/Rationale: The Geographic Management of Cancer Health Disparities Program (GMaP), initiated in 2009, is a national program designed to enhance capacity in the areas of disparities research; recruitment and career/professional development of underrepresented investigators, trainees, and students; communication and dissemination; and evaluation. It aims to build region-based “hubs” to support efficient management of cancer health disparities (CHD) research, training, and outreach. GMaP Region 2 covers Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi, and Puerto Rico.The purpose of this poster is to inform students, trainees, early stage investigators (ESIs) and funded scientists in GMaP Region 2 about career development and mentoring opportunities. It describes a series of strategies to expand and strengthen GMaP Region 2 partnerships particularly with minority serving institutions (MSIs), and increase CHD related information dissemination and communication of resources. Methods/Approach: Since 2015, Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida has served as the regional GMaP hub collaboratively working closely with the Internal Coordinating Committee (ICC), a group comprised of representatives from academic cancer centers and universities to plan and direct GMaP Region 2 activities.GMaP activities include travel and expert grant review awards; CHD targeted training; research pilot funding; cluster meeting awards; and regional communications about current research and training opportunities. Partnerships with regional National Outreach Network (NON) CHEs to strengthen community education and outreach efforts in underserved communities are also integrated into the GMaP Region 2 activities. Results: To date, GMAP Region 2 held a kick-off strategic planning retreat with ICC members in January 2016, and continues to host quarterly planning calls. GMaP Region 2 awarded a total of 7 travel awards to Assistant Professors (1), PhD Candidates (2), Post-Doctoral Fellows (2), and ESIs(2). Institutional affiliation of travel award recipients include: Morehouse School of Medicine (2); Tuskegee University (2); Ponce Health Sciences University (1); University of South Florida (1); and University of Florida (1). A total of four E-blasts and one newsletter were distributed to over 350 cancer and CHD researchers throughout the region. Partnerships with regional NON-CHEs resulted in an educational webinar aimed to educate researchers on the vital role of CHEs in CHD research. Other initiatives, including expert grant (pre-submission) review, regional collaborative cluster awards, pilot funding and targeted trainings are being developed. Also, a collaborative work plan to identify and support potential K- series applicants is underway across all regions. Conclusion/Implications: The diversity in GMaP Region 2 and collaborative institutional partners fosters critical and collective endeavors that can potentially advance effective tackling of CHD through training and collaborative team science research. Increasing access to CHD training opportunities for underrepresented investigators, trainees/students and ESIs is an essential step to equip the next generation of researchers with tools required to reduce health outcomes related to CHD. Key to this process are engaging communications, robust partnerhships, and ideas fueled by diverse academic and community members from our region. Citation Format: Kimberly Williams, Khaliah Fleming, Clement K. Gwede, Cathy Meade, Teresita Munoz-Antonia, Thomas Sellers. Geographic management of cancer health disparities program (GMaP) region 2: An emphasis on regional institutional partnership and collaborative training of future health disparities researchers. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Ninth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2016 Sep 25-28; Fort Lauderdale, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26(2 Suppl):Abstract nr A85.

Background: The Geographic Management of Cancer Health Disparities Program (GMaP) Region 6 is oriented to provide assistance to under-represented minority scholars and early stage investigators (ESIs) throughout Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Hawaii, Guam, and American Samoa. Much of the assistance needed has been defined by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Internal Coordinating Committee of GMaP Region 6. In an effort to gain a better understanding of how we can support our constituents, the Internal Coordinating Committee of GMaP Region 6 reached out to scholars and ESIs to learn about their previous experience with the services offered and what additional services they desired from the region. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify the needs and types of assistance desired by scholars and ESIs within GMaP Region 6. Methods: A SurveyMonkey survey was developed that included both quantitative and qualitative responses to questions about the services offered by GMaP Region 6. Additional questions asked participants if they had taken advantage of the services provided. In addition, qualitative questions were asked about additional assistance/services desired. The survey was sent to a listserv comprised of 156 NCI-identified scholars and ESIs in Region 6. Results: Responses were received from 42 scholars and ESIs. Of respondents, 67.6% were female, 89.2% were of a race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White, 61.9% had PhDs, and 43.9% had received funding (e.g., diversity supplement, F31, T32, R25) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Participants desired more diverse training opportunities, more prospects for receiving feedback on grants, biosketches, and other portions of NIH grants, more networking opportunities, and more training in specific topics related to health disparities research (e.g., CBPR, epidemiology, survey methods). The Internal Coordinating Committee of GMaP Region 6 met to design a plan to accommodate the requests of the scholars and ESIs, which include a mentorship program, training workshops, and a networking program for pre-graduate scholars. Those plans will be implemented in the next three years in the region. Discussion: As advocates of engaging stakeholders as a method for fostering research among the underserved, the GMaP Region 6 Internal Coordinating Committee went directly to scholars and ESIs to better understand how they desired to receive assistance from the region. Although there were some similarities with the NCI mission, there were also difference, and GMaP Region 6 is dedicated to offering services to meet those additional expressed needs of scholars and ESIs in the Region. Citation Format: Beti Thompson, Heidi Tham. Enhancing career development opportunities for scholars and early-stage investigators: Plans based on responses from the participants. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eighth AACR Conference on The Science of Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; Nov 13-16, 2015; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016;25(3 Suppl):Abstract nr A49.

Purpose: The main aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between research self-efficacy and the perception of the research training environment, interest in research, research mentoring experience, and research knowledge within a sample of Ph.D. students (N=120) at a local university in Malaysia. Method: Correlation and regression analysis were employed to investigate the impact of research mentoring, research training environment, interest in research and research knowledge on research self-efficacy. Self-reported questionnaires and a research knowledge test were distributed to the Ph.D. students in the university to collect the data. Findings: An apparent correlation was found between research self-efficacy, research training environment, interest in research and research mentoring while research self-efficacy was not correlated with research knowledge. Research training environment and interest in research contributed to 26 percent of the variance of change in research self-efficacy. Implications for research and practice: Conducive environment in the institution fosters higher levels of research self-efficacy and encourage Ph.D. students’ research skills and development. Furthermore, the incorporation of research methodology as a compulsory course in the Ph.D. study serves to improve students’ research interest and knowledge. The self-efficacy theory helps to assist decision making in identifying future researchers in the institution.

From Intention to Action: Operationalizing AGA Diversity Policy to Combat Racism and Health Disparities in Gastroenterology

American Heart Association's 2024 Impact Goal: Every Person Deserves the Opportunity for a Full, Healthy Life.

Racial Disparities and Excess Cardiovascular Mortality Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Time for a Solution

This study examined the mediating role of Research Self-Efficacy (RSE) in the relationship between Research Knowledge (RK) and Research Productivity (RP) among teacher educators. Utilizing a descriptive-correlational research design with mediation analysis, data were collected from 100 faculty members of the College of Teacher Education across eight campuses of a state university in Northern Philippines. RK was measured using the Research Capability Test (RCT), RP was assessed through the Research Capability Rubric (RCR), and RSE was evaluated using the Research Self-Efficacy Scale (RSES), all of which demonstrated strong validity and reliability. Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant and positive relationships among RK, RSE, and RP. Regression analysis confirmed that both RK and RSE significantly predict RP, with RSE demonstrating a stronger influence on RP than RK, highlighting the crucial role of self-efficacy in driving research engagement. Mediation analysis confirmed that RSE accounted for 32.3% of the total effect of RK on RP, indicating partial mediation. This finding suggests that while RK directly influences RP, its impact is significantly enhanced through RSE. The bootstrapped results (5,000 resamples) further validated the statistical robustness of the mediation effect, emphasizing the crucial role of self-efficacy in bridging the gap between research knowledge and productivity. The significant mediation effect means that improving faculty members’ confidence in doing research can help make their research knowledge more useful, which may lead to higher research output. This shows that believing in one’s ability to do research plays an important role in turning knowledge into actual research work. These findings highlight the need for faculty development programs that integrate both research training and self-efficacy-building initiatives to improve research engagement.

The Future of Nursing 2020–2030: Charting a path to achieve health equity

This article examines the pathway of those pursuing early careers in the cardiovascular sciences, both past and present, highlighting new challenges and the roadblocks they present. This article emphasizes the need for multitasking in today’s academic environment and provides information about career training opportunities offered by the American Heart Association. During the past 10 years in academia, we have heard terms like early career and early-stage investigator with increasing frequency. During my doctoral work and postdoctoral training in the early 2000s, career stage, or status, was less concerning to bench scientists. Now, however, the scientific community has come to the consensus that systematic training is integral to doctoral and postdoctoral studies, as students and fellows try to balance the requirements of their discipline with the exigencies of modern-day scientific professionalism. According to the National Institutes of Health, an early-stage investigator is defined as “those who are within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or … within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent).” After the introduction of policies designed to assist early-stage investigators who are competing for funding with more established investigators, the number of competing R01 awards offered to those meeting that definition has steadily increased. In addition, special scoring consideration has been afforded to this group, along with enhanced emphasis on their proposed research projects. In fact, discussions geared toward supporting early-career researchers are hinting that steps should be taken to reduce the amount of time trainees spend in graduate school and postdoctoral training. As Chair of the Basic Cardiovascular Sciences Early Career Committee, I am privileged to write this article about the extensive training opportunities provided to early careerists by the American Heart Association (AHA). Early careerists are the innovators who will bring new ideas and technologies to the fight against cardiovascular disease. …

Equity in Global Health Research.

Academic-community research partnerships focusing on addressing the social determinants of health and reducing health disparities have grown substantially in the last three decades. Early-stage investigators (ESIs), however, are less likely to receive grant funding from organizations like the National Institutes of Health, and we know little about the facilitators and barriers they face on their career journeys or the best ways to support them and their community research partnerships. This study examines ESIs' experiences with a program that funded and supported their community-partnered pilot health disparities research. Fourteen ESIs from five cohorts of pilot investigators participated in in-depth focus groups between April 2020 and February 2024. Two reviewers independently identified significant quotes and created codes. Thematic analysis was used to develop relevant themes. The overarching theme was that the program was a launch pad for the ESIs' research careers. Four distinct sub-themes contributing to the launch pad theme were: (1) ESI Growth & Adaptation; (2) Community and Support; (3) The Value of Collaboration and Partnership; (4) Need for Effective Mentorship. The results suggest the program offered ESIs and community partners substantial, unique support and resources, but challenges remained. Future programs helping ESIs who conduct community-engaged research to launch their research careers should consider implementing tailored support while offering strategies to eliminate or reduce institutional barriers, including strengthening mentoring.

Background/Purpose: Increasing participation of under-represented minorities (URMs) in cancer-related fields is critical for eliminating disparities in prevention, incidence, prevalence, detection, treatment, survival, and mortality. Early engagement in scientific research is linked to retention of students in STEM programs and careers. Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (DF/HCC) is one of the largest consortium comprehensive cancer centers in the world. As part of the mission to find new and innovative ways to combat cancer and eliminate cancer disparities in communities throughout the Northeast, we are shaping the development of a new, diverse, and educated workforce through the Continuing Umbrella of Research Experiences (CURE) program. CURE introduces high-school and college students from URM populations to the world of cancer research. The program aims to increase URMs successfully pursuing careers in biomedicine, cancer research, and/or health disparities, pursuing graduate degrees and/or professional training in these areas, and engaging in scholarly activity. Initially funded through a cancer center supplement, during the past two years DFHCC has expanded their programming by successfully obtaining two NCI R25 grants, Young Empowered Scientists for ContinUed Research Engagement (YES for CURE) Program (NCI CA221738) and Summer Program to Advance Research Careers (SPARC) Program (NCI CA214256). Description: DF/HCC has engaged over 400 students in research experiences at its seven-member institutions. Building on a 17-year history of research training experience and a long-term partnership with the University of Massachusetts Boston (UMB), DF/HCC created programming that combines hands-on research experiences with professional development seminars, journal clubs, book clubs, social events, and individual project planning. Evaluation: Students and mentors are surveyed each summer to identify opportunities for improvement. We also track academic and professional progress of our alumni annually. Usefulness: Based on our 2017 survey with a 71% average response rate, 95% of our alumni have completed or are currently enrolled in post-secondary programs, with 72% completing college degrees so far. Of these, 83% graduated with STEM or health science degrees and 23% have additionally completed graduate degrees. Over two thirds of our alumni are currently working full- or part-time in STEM-related fields and almost 25% in cancer-related work. 15% are working in a health disparities-related field. Our alumni have coauthored more than 243 scientific publications. Our research education and training successfully engage the scientific curiosity and promote the academic success and future research careers of promising young URM scientists. Learning Objectives: The participant shall be able to learn best practices for engaging high school and college students from under-represented backgrounds in hands-on cancer research. References E. De Chubin and AL DePass, editors. Understanding interventions that broaden participation in science careers. In Understanding Interventions, San Diego, CA, 2015. K. Maton, T. Beason, S. Godsay, M. Sto. Domingo, T. Bailey, S. Sun and F. Hrabowski. Outcomes and processes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Research Program: STEM PhD Completion, Sense of Community, Perceived Program Benefit, Science Identity, and Research Self-Efficacy. CBE–Life Sciences Education 15: 3 (Ar48), 2016. M. Ghee, M. Keels, D. Collins, C. Neal-Spence and E. Baker. Fine-tuning summer research programs to promote underrepresented students' persistence in the STEM pathway. CBE-Life Sciences Education 15: 3 (Ar28), 2016. Citation Format: Karen Burns White, Emily McMains, Diedra Wrighting, Joan Becker, Kathynie Hinds. Lessons learned from seventeen years of cancer research experiences program for under-represented high school and college students [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2018 Nov 2-5; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(6 Suppl):Abstract nr IA16.