Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory Research Articles

Promoting a more diverse and inclusive research workforce through the research scholars program

BackgroundNovel and comprehensive approaches are needed to address shortcomings in the diversity and inclusiveness of the scientific workforce. In response to this need and informed by multiple programs and data sources, we created the Research Scholars Program (RSP). The RSP is a yearlong program for early-career faculty with an overall objective to overcome barriers to the academic success, retention, progression, and promotion of groups underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research. The goal of the RSP is to increase research confidence and productivity, build a supportive research community, and reduce isolation by providing personal and group research enrichment to junior faculty through professional development, mentorship, and networking.MethodsWe adapted evidence-based approaches for our institutional context and vetted the RSP across our campus. The resulting RSP consists of three main elements: (1) five levels of Mosaic Mentorship; (2) group and tailored professional development programming; and (3) scientific and social networking. To determine the potential of the RSP to improve research confidence critical to success, we used a modified shortened version of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI-12) to assess participants’ confidence in performing a variety of research tasks before and after program participation. We collected information about retention, promotion, and grants submitted and awarded. Additionally, we conducted semi-structured exit interviews with each scholar after program participation to identify programmatic strengths and areas for improvement. Data for Cohorts 1 and 2 (N = 12) were analyzed.ResultsOur assessment finds, with one exception, increasing confidence in participants’ research skills across all items, ranging from 0.4 (4.7%) to 2.6 (40.6%). In their exit interviews, the Research Scholars (RS) described their improved productivity and increased sense of belonging and support from others. Research Scholars noted numerous components of the RSP as strengths, including the Mosaic Mentorship model, professional development programming, and opportunities for both informal and formal interactions. Respondents identified time pressure, a lack of feedback, and unclear expectations of the various mentorship roles as areas in which the program can improve.ConclusionPreliminary findings indicate that the RSP is successful in building the research confidence of underrepresented and disadvantaged early-career faculty. While this report focuses on the development and protocol of the RSP, additional cohorts and data will provide the evidence base to support dissemination as a national model of research professional development. Such programming is critical to ensure sustainable support structures, institutional networks, infrastructure, and resources that will improve discovery and equity through inclusive excellence.

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

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. 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. 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). 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.

Evaluation of an experiential training program in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research for diverse researcher communities and health care organizations

The goal of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Partnership was to prepare health care professionals and researchers to conduct patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research (CER). Substantial evidence gaps, heterogeneous health care systems, and decision-making challenges in the USA underscore the need for evidence-based strategies. We engaged five community-based health care organizations that serve diverse and underrepresented patient populations from Hawai'i to Minnesota. Each partner nominated two in-house scholars to participate in the 2-year program. The program focused on seven competencies pertinent to patient-centered outcomes and CER. It combined in-person and experiential learning with asynchronous, online education, and created adaptive, pragmatic learning opportunities and a Summer Institute. Metrics included the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), a tool designed to assess research self-efficacy and clinical research skills across 10 domains. We trained 31 scholars in 3 cohorts. Mean scores in nine domains of the CRAI improved; greater improvement was observed from the beginning to the midpoint than from the midpoint to conclusion of the program. Across all three cohorts, mean scores on 52 items (100%) increased (p ≤ 0.01), and 91% of scholars reported the program improved their skills moderately/significantly. Satisfaction with the program was high (91%). Investigators that conduct patient-centered outcomes and CER must know how to collaborate with regional health care systems to identify priorities; pose questions; design, conduct, and disseminate observational and experimental research; and transform knowledge into practical clinical applications. Training programs such as ours can facilitate such collaborations.

An Instrument for Measuring Critical Appraisal Self-Efficacy in Rheumatology Trainees.

Self-efficacy, the internal belief that one can perform a specific task successfully, influences behavior. To promote critical appraisal of medical literature, rheumatology training programs should foster both competence and self-efficacy for critical appraisal. This study aimed to investigate whether select items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), an instrument measuring clinical research self-efficacy, could be used to measure critical appraisal self-efficacy (CASE). One hundred twenty-five trainees from 33 rheumatology programs were sent a questionnaire that included two sections of the CRAI. Six CRAI items relevant to CASE were identified a priori; responses generated a CASE score (total score range 0-10; higher=greater confidence in one's ability to perform a specific task successfully). CASE scores' internal structure and relation to domain-concordant variables were analyzed. Questionnaires were completed by 112 of 125 (89.6%) trainees. CASE scores ranged from 0.5 to 8.2. The six CRAI items contributing to the CASE score demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.95) and unidimensionality. Criterion validity was supported by the findings that participants with higher CASE scores rated their epidemiology and biostatistics understanding higher than that of peers (P < 0.0001) and were more likely to report referring to studies to answer clinical questions (odds ratio 2.47, 95% confidence interval 1.41-4.33; P=0.002). The correlation of CASE scores with percentage of questions answered correctly was only moderate, supporting discriminant validity. The six-item CASE instrument demonstrated content validity, internal consistency, discriminative capability, and criterion validity, including correlation with self-reported behavior, supporting its potential as a useful measure of critical appraisal self-efficacy.

Rapid Adaptation and Remote Delivery of Undergraduate Research Training during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

When COVID-19 caused worldwide cancellations of summer research immersion programs in 2020, Mayo Clinic rallied to create an alternate virtual experience called Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR). SFIR was designed not only to ensure the continuance of science pathways training for undergraduate scientists but also to support undergraduate mental wellbeing, given the known pandemic stressors. A total of 170 participants took part in the program and were surveyed pre-post for outcomes in biomedical research career knowledge, biomedical research career interest, research skills confidence, and three dimensions of mental wellbeing. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following participation in SFIR. The participants’ mean research skills confidence also rose between 0.08 and 1.32 points on a 7-point scale across 12 items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Success in science pathways support was accompanied by positive shifts in participant mental wellbeing. Measurable decreases in stress (Perceived Stress Scale, p < 0.0001) accompanied gains in resilience (Brief Resilience Scale, p < 0.0001) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale, p = 0.0005). Collectively, the data suggest that core objectives of traditional in-person summer research programming can be accomplished virtually and that these programs can simultaneously impact student wellbeing. This theoretical framework is particularly salient during COVID-19, but the increased accessibility of virtual programs such as SFIR can continue to bolster science education pathways long after the pandemic is gone.

Exploring clinical research efficacy of teaching and practicing medical professionals in Pakistan.

Objective:The current study aimed to explore clinical research efficacy of teaching and practicing medical professionals in Pakistan. The role of socio-demographic factors in this context was also investigated.Methods:This study using cross-sectional research design was carried out from August to December 2019. A sample of teaching and practicing medical professionals (N=96) was collected through purposive sampling from Islamabad and Rawalpindi. Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI) was used along with the demographic datasheet. Research data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-21).Results:The results of the study revealed that teaching and practicing medical professionals feel most competent in ‘collaborating with others’ while the research area in which they feel least competent is ‘securing funds for a study’. It was found that there are significant differences in the research efficacy of teaching and practicing medical professionals with reference to age (p< 0.00), gender (p< 0.01), designation (p< 0.00), number of articles published (p< 0.00), number of articles under review (p< 0.03), number of articles submitted (p< 0.03), and number of funded projects completed (p< 0.02). Satisfaction with salary and number of hours at work per week have no impact on their research efficacy.Conclusions:Findings have implications for policy makers and medical institutions to promote research skills in teaching and practicing medical professionals.

A distance clinical research training course in Ghana

Clinical research training in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has not been adequately incorporated into local physicians' education. The lack of trained physician–scientists in LMICs is due in part to poor research infrastructure in these areas including limited funding support and scarcity of senior-level physician–scientists to provide training in research methodology. This article describes the structure, content, and evaluation of a combined synchronous/asynchronous distance and onsite learning program implemented in Kumasi, Ghana, to train physicians in clinical research. The course was delivered over 18 months and was associated with a clinical research study for which the participants were coinvestigators. A substantial increase in clinical research self-efficacy, as measured by the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory, was found at the end of the course compared to baseline. This course could serve as a model for the delivery of clinical research training in other LMICs. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medcal knowledge, Practice-based learning and improvement.

Training methods that improve MD-PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills.

MD-PhD training programs train physician-scientists to pursue careers involving both clinical care and research, but decreasing numbers of physician-scientists stay engaged in clinical research. We sought to identify current clinical research training methods utilized by MD-PhD programs and to assess how effective they are in promoting self-efficacy for clinical research. The US MD-PhD students were surveyed in April-May 2018. Students identified the clinical research training methods they participated in, and self-efficacy in clinical research was determined using a modified 12-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Responses were received from 61 of 108 MD-PhD institutions. Responses were obtained from 647 MD-PhD students in all years of training. The primary methods of clinical research training included no clinical research training, and various combinations of didactics, mentored clinical research, and a clinical research practicum. Students with didactics plus mentored clinical research had similar self-efficacy as those with didactics plus clinical research practicum. Training activities that differentiated students who did and did not have the clinical research practicum experience and were associated with higher self-efficacy included exposure to Institutional Review Boards and participation in human subject recruitment. A clinical research practicum was found to be an effective option for MD-PhD students conducting basic science research to gain experience in clinical research skills. Clinical research self-efficacy was correlated with the amount of clinical research training and specific clinical research tasks, which may inform curriculum development for a variety of clinical and translational research training programs, for example, MD-PhD, TL1, and KL2.

Design of a Multidisciplinary Training Program in Complementary and Integrative Health Clinical Research: Building Research Across Interdisciplinary Gaps.

Despite wide use by the public, limited evidence is available for many complementary and integrative health (CIH) practices. Thus, clinical researchers knowledgeable about CIH disciplines are necessary to study the efficacy and effectiveness of CIH practices to benefit the public health. To partially address the need for clinical researchers versed in CIH, the authors of this study report the design of an interprofessional clinical research training program focused on CIH, the Building Research across Interdisciplinary Gaps (BRIDG) program, supported by a 5-year T90/R90 grant from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. The T90-supported arm of the program trains doctoral-level CIH providers in clinical research at the research-intensive University of Washington. The R90-supported arm of the program trains researchers with conventional backgrounds in the practices of CIH at the clinic-intensive National University of Natural Medicine. The "Translational Science Spectrum" provides a common conceptual framework for both programs. Specific program elements include: individualized didactic training in clinical research and CIH disciplines; placement with clinical research mentors; placement with clinical mentors in CIH disciplines; shared and independent research project development; and interdisciplinary experiences through seminars and retreats. Program evaluation includes annual completion of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), which queries confidence in research skills and methods and periodic evaluation of training elements using the Supplemental Kellogg Logic-World Health Organization model, which emphasizes relevance, adequacy, efficiency, effectiveness, process, impact, equity, and sustainability. The BRIDG program exemplifies a new standard in interprofessional clinical research training, made possible through strong collaboration between disparate research- and clinically intensive institutions.

2242 Evaluation of a clinical investigation curriculum: Post-graduate outcomes

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Many CTSA programs have implemented curricula leading to clinical investigation master’s degrees. Evaluation of long-term outcomes for graduates can support curriculum improvement. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We evaluated graduates 1–3 years post completion of an MS in Clinical Investigation at the University of Utah. We administered the 12-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI-12) describing confidence in ability to perform research tasks; we derived 6 CRAI sub-scales. Additional questionnaire items assessed current engagement in research, including percent of effort devoted to research and level of involvement in research projects using specific research methods. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Graduates reported high confidence for the CRAI domain of reporting, interpreting, and presenting (on a scale of 0–20, mean 17.9±SD 1.9) and the domain of conceptualizing and collaborating (16.5±2.2) on research projects; confidence was somewhat lower in the domains of planning (14.6±3.3) and funding (14.9±2.8) projects. Graduates’ estimated current professional effort devoted to research had a median of 32%, interquartile range (IQR) 20%–70%; among graduates with clinical responsibilities, median effort devoted to research was 23%, IQR 15%–45%. In total, 74% of graduates reported moderate or high involvement in research using existing large databases, 46% reported moderate or high involvement in comparative effectiveness research, and 54% reported moderate or high involvement in quality improvement. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: A majority of clinical investigation graduates remain engaged in research but most are able to devote less than one-third of professional effort to research. Evaluation of clinical investigation graduates who have moved into their research careers can inform program directors about domains of research expertise and methodological areas that may merit additional emphasis in the curriculum.

A Program for Promoting Clinical Scholarship in General Surgery

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education mandates resident physician training in the principles and applications of research. To provide a robust early foundation for effective engagement in scholarship, we designed a novel clinical scholarship program (CSP) for PGY1 general surgery residents. In a general surgery residency training program, we assessed resident academic productivity (i.e., presentations, publications, and sustained engagement in clinical research) and self-efficacy to conduct clinical research, as well as the overall satisfaction of both residents and faculty mentors. The clinical research appraisal inventory was administered both before and after completion of the CSP rotation. Totally, 44 categorical general surgery trainees and 23 faculty research mentors participated in the CSP from 2011 to 2016; 26 residents (59%) presented at regional or national meetings. Of the 35 residents who were 24 or more months beyond their PGY1 training period, 16 (46%) have published their CSP project, 5 (14%) report continued commitment towards publication, and 22 (63%) have ≥1 clinical research publications beyond their CSP participation during residency, excluding publications arising from subsequent formal research fellowships. Clinical research appraisal inventory responses indicate significant improvement (p < 0.005) in clinical research self-efficacy. A structured CSP increases the confidence of trainees to perform clinical research and leads to significant contributions directed at addressing clinically meaningful problems in surgery. Faculty-guided resident research at a very early stage of clinical training supplements other mentorship experiences and encourages the development of surgeons who will engage in life-long clinical problem solving.

2069

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Clinical research in the 21st century will require a well-trained workforce to insure that research protocols yield valid and reliable results. Several organizations have developed lists of core competencies for clinical trial coordinators, administrators, monitors, data management/informaticians, regulatory affairs personnel, and others. While the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory assesses the self-confidence of physician scientists to be clinical investigators, no such index exists to assess the competence of clinical research professionals who coordinate, monitor, and administer clinical trials. We developed the Competency Index for Clinical Research Professionals (CICRP) as a general index of competency (ie, GCPs) as well as sub-scales to assess competency in the specific domains of Medicines Development; Ethics and Participant Safety; Data Management; and Research Methods. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We analyzed data collected by the Joint Task Force on the Harmonization of Core Competencies from a survey of research professionals working in the United States and Canada. Respondents reported how competent they believed themselves to be on 51 clinical research core competencies. Factor analyzes identified 20 core competencies that defined a Competency Index for Clinical Research Professionals—General (CICRP-General, ie, GCPs) and 4 subindices that define specialized research functions: Medicines Development; Ethics and Participant Safety; Data Management; and Research Concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Factor analysis identified 20 core competencies that defined a Competency Index for Clinical Research Professionals—General (CICRP-General, ie, GCPs) and 4 subindices that define specialized research functions: Medicines Development; Ethics and Participant Safety; Data Management; and Research Concepts. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: These indices can be used to gage an individual’s readiness to perform general as well as more advanced research functions; to assess the education and training needs of research workers; and to evaluate the impact of education and training programs on the competency of research coordinators, monitors, and other clinical research team members.

Development and Evaluation of Two Abbreviated Questionnaires for Mentoring and Research Self-Efficacy.

To reduce respondent burden for future evaluations of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-supported Programs to Increase Diversity Among Individuals Engaged in Health-Related Research (PRIDE), a mentored-research education program, we sought to shorten the 33-item Ragins and McFarlin Mentor Role Instrument (RMMRI), measuring mentor-role appraisals, and the 69-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), measuring research self-efficacy. Three nationally recruited, junior-faculty cohorts attended two, annual 2-3 week Summer Institutes (SI-1/SI-2: 2011/2012, 2012/2013, 2013/2014) at one of six PRIDE sites. Mentees completed the RMMRI two months after mentor assignment and the CRAI at baseline (pre-SI-1) and 6-month (mid-year) and 12-month (post-SI-2) follow-up. Publications data obtained from Scopus in October 2015 were verified with mentees' curriculum vitae. The RMMRI and CRAI were shortened using an iterative process of principal-components analysis. The shortened measures were examined in association with each other (multiple linear regression) and with increase in publications (repeated-measures analysis of covariance). PRIDE enrolled 152 mentees (70% women; 60% Black, 35% Hispanic/Latino). Cronbach's alphas for the new 9-item RMMRI, 19-item CRAI, and four CRAI-19 subscales were excellent. Controlling for baseline self-efficacy and cohort, RMMRI-9 scores were independently, positively associated with post-SI-2 scores on the CRAI-19 and three subscales (writing, study design/data analysis, and collaboration/grant preparation). Controlling for cohort, higher RMMRI-9 and post-SI-2 CRAI-19 scores were each associated with greater increase in publications. The RMMRI-9 and CRAI-19 retained the excellent psychometric properties of the longer measures. Findings support use of the shortened measures in future evaluations of PRIDE.

Junior Investigators Thinking About Quitting Research: A Survey.

Junior tenure-track faculty report high levels of stress and low satisfaction; the increasingly competitive funding environment compounds this discontent. We examined factors associated with junior investigators who were thinking about quitting research. Data were collected as part of a program evaluation of an interdisciplinary research mentoring program in an academic medical center. Of the 62 mentees, 44 responded to the survey (71%). When asked "In the past year, have you considered quitting research?" 39 mentees answered the question; 17 (44%) answered in the affirmative. Those who had considered quitting had lower scores on the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory-12 (CRAI-12) and job satisfaction and higher scores on burnout. In a regression model, we found that only CRAI-12 scores were significantly, inversely associated with thinking about quitting. Factors associated with thinking about quitting included lower confidence in research skills, reduced job satisfaction, and higher levels of burnout.

Development and testing of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory-Short Form.

The National Academy of Sciences stressed the need for a doctorally prepared workforce and earlier entry into doctoral study in nursing and the behavioral, social, and basic sciences. Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) suggests that self-efficacy for career related skills informs career choices. Thus, increasing clinical research self-efficacy early in students' studies could increase their choice of a research career. To test interventions, a psychometrically sound measure of clinical research self-efficacy is needed. We examined the psychometrics of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory-Short Form (CRAI-SF) in undergraduate and first-year graduate students (N = 268). This scale is a modification of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory, which measures physician-scientists' clinical research self-efficacy. Content validity was supported by external review. Factor analysis revealed six factors explaining 75% of scale variance. Internal consistency of subscales and total scale ranged from .84 to .98. Differences in scores by gender (p = .016) and discipline of study (p = .000) supported construct validity. The CRAI-SF is a useful measure of undergraduate and first-year graduate students' perceived clinical research self-efficacy.

A Shortened Version of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory

The original Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), which assesses the self-confidence of trainees in performing different aspects of clinical research, comprises 92 items. Completing the lengthy CRAI is time-consuming and represents a considerable burden to respondents, yet the CRAI provides useful data for evaluating research training programs. The purpose of this study is to develop a shortened version of the CRAI and to test its validity and reliability. Trainees in clinical research degree and career development programs at the University of Pittsburgh's Institute for Clinical Research Education completed the 92-item CRAI between 2007 and 2012, inclusive. The authors conducted, first, exploratory factor analysis on a training dataset (2007-2010) to reduce the number of items and, then, confirmatory factor analyses on a testing dataset (2011-2012) to test the psychometric properties of the shortened version. Of 546 trainees, 394 (72%) provided study data. Exploratory factor analysis revealed six distinct factors, and confirmatory factor analysis identified the two items with the highest loadings per factor, for a total of 12 items. Cronbach alpha for the six new factors ranged from 0.80 to 0.94. Factors in the 12-item CRAI were strongly and significantly associated with factors in the 92-item CRAI; correlations ranged from 0.82 to 0.96 (P < .001 for each). The 12-item CRAI is faster and less burdensome to complete but retains the strong psychometric properties of the original CRAI.

Factor Structure of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI)

The Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI) is a 92-item measure covering 10 domains of research self-efficacy. A known behavioral antecedent, reliable and valid measures of self-efficacy represent a potentially useful tool in the evaluation of research training program efficacy. However, few formal psychometric studies of this instrument exist. Using exploratory factor analysis, we examine the CRAI's dimensional structure in a new sample of clinical research trainees. In contrast to the multidimensional solutions reported previously, CRAI responses in the present sample were unambiguously one-dimensional (as suggested by a dominant single Eigenvalue and parallel analysis). This discrepant finding may reflect sample differences in research experience, as unlike previous studies, participants had all already obtained a professional degree. The CRAI's dimensional structure may coalesce into a smaller number of factors as research experience is acquired, and investigators should be mindful of this possibility in future studies of the instrument.

Evaluation of Clinical Research Training Programs Using the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory

The purpose of this study was to measure change in clinical research self-efficacy after participating in KL2, postdoctoral and predoctoral clinical research training programs at Washington University School of Medicine. We surveyed program participants using a 76-item version of the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI). Principal components analysis (PCA) examined the CRAI’s underlying factor structure; Cronbach alpha measured the internal consistency of items on each subscale and the overall CRAI. CRAI score changes from baseline to 1-year follow-up were assessed using repeated-measures analysis of variance. All 29 KL2, 47 postdoctoral, and 31 TL1 scholars enrolled 2006-2009 (mean age 31.6 years, range 22-44; 59.6% female; 65.4% white) completed baseline surveys. Of these participants, 22 KL2, 17 postdoctoral, and 21 TL1 scholars completed the 1-year follow-up assessment. PCA resulted in a seven-factor solution with 69 items (alphas > 0.849 for each subscale and 69-item CRAI). Significant improvements at 1-year follow-up were observed across all programs for Study Design/Data Analysis ( p = .016), Interpreting/Reporting/Presenting ( p = .034), and overall CRAI ( p = .050). Differences between programs were observed for all but one subscale (each p < .05). Clinical research self-efficacy increased 1 year after clinical research training. Whether this short-term outcome correlates with long-term clinical research productivity, requires further study.

Faculty mentors’ and students’ perceptions of students’ research self-efficacy

Mentoring in nursing is an important process for socializing nurse researchers, developing a body of professional knowledge, and influencing career choices of students. Self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) is concerned with one's perceived ability to perform tasks within a specific domain. The purpose of this study was to compare undergraduate and graduate student's perceptions of their abilities to pursue research (research self-efficacy) with their mentors' perceptions. A cross-sectional design was used to study mentors in any academic discipline who received external funding and worked with an undergraduate or graduate student on the research study. Recruitment and data collection were completed using the Internet and included 21 faculty mentors and student dyads. The Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory was used to measure research self-efficacy. Differences between the faculty mentor's perception of the student's confidence in research and students' perception were significant at p=<0.001. Misjudgment of efficacy appraisals can result in opportunities forsaken and careers not pursued. Assisting mentors to guide students' skill perfection may increase students' choice of research careers, promote the effectiveness of mentorship, aid in the development of a body of professional knowledge and benefit careers of both mentors and students.

Assessing Research Self-Efficacy in Physician-Scientists: The Clinical Research APPraisal Inventory

Between 1980 and 1993, only 19% of medical school graduates chose faculty appointments with research responsibilities. Women and minorities represent only a small fraction of these, despite their growing numbers. The authors' goal is to study the effects of human agency, particularly self-efficacy, on the career development of physician researchers, especially women and people of color; therefore, we developed a reliable and valid inventory for assessing clinical research self-efficacy in a population of physicians training for clinical research careers. Scale items were pooled from expert knowledge, relevant literature, and existing inventories to create a 92-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory that was factor analyzed and refined to include 88 items. Although instruments have been developed to successfully assess research self-efficacy, this is the first instrument designed to assess self-efficacy in the clinical research domain using a population of academic physicians.