Early-career Physician-scientists Research Articles

Breast Imaging Research: Tips for Obtaining Funding and Sustaining a Successful Career.

Many factors are involved in the successful development of early career breast imaging radiologists into independent investigators conducting impactful research. Key basic prerequisites for success include a motivated and resilient radiologist, institutional and departmental commitment to supporting early career physician-scientists, strong mentorship, and a flexible strategy for extramural funding that accounts for individualized professional goals. In this review, we describe these factors in greater detail, providing a practical overview for residents, fellows, and junior faculty who are interested in an academic career as a breast imaging radiologist engaged in original scientific research. We also describe the essential pieces of grant applications and summarize the professional milestones for early career physician-scientists as they look toward promotion to associate professor and sustained extramural funding.

Predictors of academic career progression among early career physician-scientists via an intensive research training program abroad: a case study

BackgroundDespite extensive efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist pipeline, attrition has been observed along the physician-scientist developmental pathway. Research exposure during clinical training is considered an important factor favoring the decision to pursue an academic career pathway.MethodsThe authors sought to identify factors associated with academic career progression among junior physician-scientists following the completion of an intensive research training program, using the framework of the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), to benefit the design of efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist career pipeline. We conducted a retrospective study of 108 physicians who completed a long-term research training program abroad during residency, or within a few years post-residency completion, between 2010 and 2017. With potential predictors of academic career progression prioritized by SCCT, multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of sustained research involvement, high productivity and high research competency after training, respectively. The SCCT was used to illuminate our findings.ResultsCo-publications with training supervisors abroad and medical oncology/pediatric oncology as a clinical specialty were positively associated with sustained research involvement and high productivity. Joining the training program after the age of 36 was negatively associated with high research competency. All of the predictors shared a common feature of high correlation with both self-efficacy and environmental elements, the reciprocal interactions of which may affect the career progression of physician-scientists.ConclusionsInsights gained through this analysis provide policy recommendations for the designing of efforts to revitalize the physician-scientist career pipeline. Priorities should be given to institutional oversight to ensure strengthened self-efficacy at the beginning of one’s academic career, by providing long-term research training opportunities to young residents and promoting co-publications with their training supervisors during the training. In order to avoid the negative impact to self-efficacy caused by patient-related burnout or academic isolation, academic medical centers should take measures to guarantee protected research time, and to develop a positive culture encouraging mentoring relationships between junior and experienced physician-scientists in medical departments.

Rethinking the Physician-Scientist Pathway.

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

Design and Implementation of a Career Development Program for Physician-Scientists: Lessons Learned.

Although skills in health services research and data science have great potential to advance the field of urogynecology, few clinical researchers obtain such training. The aim of the R25 UrogynCREST Program is to prepare the next generation of physician-scientists for a successful career in urogynecologic health services research through skilled mentoring and advanced training. The purpose of this report is to describe program implementation and lessons learned. Administered through the program institution and in partnership with the American Urogynecologic Society, this program provided junior faculty with advanced online training and, through a core facility, access to health care databases for research projects. Participants received individualized mentoring and biostatistical support. Anonymous surveys captured actionable, real-time feedback from participants as they moved through the program. Despite a limited budget, UrogynCREST maintained a core of excellent faculty, high-quality biostatistical support, and engaged, knowledgeable advisors and mentors. This allowed for similar experiences across cohorts while permitting program improvements between cohorts in faculty-participant interactions, team dynamics, and data and regulatory support. Administrative management by a single institution facilitated responses to fiscal and regulatory changes. Asynchronized learning and partnering with a society attracted a diverse group of physician-scientists. Career development programs that incorporate online education, mentoring, database access, and biostatistical support must be prepared for midprogram changes. Regular communication among stakeholders was vital. Working with a core facility provided efficient database access, but evolving regulatory and administrative processes and costs presented challenges. Our experiences implementing this program can benefit similar programs that train early-career physician-scientists.

Mentoring First-Generation and Underrepresented in Medicine Physician-Scientists by Expanding Conversations.

Mentoring First-Generation and Underrepresented in Medicine Physician-Scientists by Expanding Conversations.

Building Research Capacity in HIV and Noncommunicable Diseases in Africa: A Mentorship and Leadership Workshop Report.

Introduction:Few structured mentoring programs target early-stage investigators in Africa, creating a gap in mentorship skills where HIV burden is greatest. We describe findings from a Nigeria-based workshop for early-career physician scientists to build mentoring and leadership capacity in HIV and noncommunicable disease research.Methods:Baseline surveys captured participant demographics, confidence in implementing mentoring competencies, and perceived importance of workshop training domains. The workshop included didactic presentations, small group activities, and interactive discussions. Daily surveys evaluated sessions, and postworkshop surveys solicited overall course impressions.Results:Of the 33 participants, most were male (n = 21, 63.6%) and from medicine, laboratory sciences, and surgical specialties. “Building mentees' confidence” and “setting mentees' research goals” were ranked as areas where participants most believed they needed training. Sessions were rated favorably across five areas. Greatest improvements in mean scores were for confidence in identifying personal temperament styles, describing mentoring and leadership theories/frameworks, and developing mentoring plans. Additional identified workshop strengths were content relevance, leadership case series, interactive nature, and collegial atmosphere. All respondents indicated learning something new/useful/helpful in each session. At 6-month postworkshop, most respondents (25 of 26, 96%) had replicated or plan to replicate parts of the workshop in their departments/institutions.Discussion:Effective mentoring training initiatives targeting future academic leaders have the potential to create skilled academicians who can impart mentoring skills and competencies to their mentees.

COVID-19 and the Early-Career Physician-Scientist. Fostering Resilience beyond the Pandemic.

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.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on underrepresented early-career PhD and physician scientists.

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.

A Blueprint for Creating Mentored, Collaborative Networks for Early-Career Physician-Scientists.

The objective is to improve the high-quality collaborative research of early-career investigators, the American Urogynecologic Society/Pelvic Floor Disorders Foundation funded and developed the Junior Faculty Research Network (JFRN). The purpose of this report is to describe the process of development of the network, discuss barriers, acknowledge accomplishments, and provide a framework for future collaborations. The development of the JFRN provided sponsorship and mentorship, supported collaboration, and created a network structure for early-career investigators. A request for applications was circulated, requiring a competitive submission process, and 6 physician-scientists were selected to participate in a multicenter trial whose initial focus was on the urinary microbiome and its interaction with sacral neuromodulation. The JFRN infrastructure consisted of early-career investigators, senior advisors, and research support staff. Study development and roll-out progressed over monthly conference calls. Initial barriers included the development of institutional participation agreements, logistics of funding disbursement, and coordination of support staff. In addition to the inaugural research project, the network continued to collaborate, and the initial grant provided pilot data for a National Institutes of Health-funded project. The JFRN is a successful mentored collaborative of early-career investigators. The creation of this self-sustaining, independent research network may serve as a blueprint for other early-career physician-scientists to participate in productive multicenter research.

Workplace resources, mentorship, and burnout in early career physician-scientists: a cross sectional study in Japan

BackgroundPhysician-scientists are a vital segment of the healthcare workforce, but they may face significant challenges balancing and integrating clinical responsibilities, scientific research, and domestic responsibilities. This study investigates factors associated with burnout among highly successful early career physician-researchers in Japan.MethodAmong 1790 physician awardees of Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists by the Japanese Ministry in 2014–2015, 490 participated in this cross-sectional survey in 2016 (usable response rate 23.8%). The primary outcome was psychological burnout, measured by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (i.e., personal burnout, work-related burnout, and patient-related burnout). “Workplace resources” in our study refers to the presence of career education in the workplace, promotion of gender equity, well-being consultation services on “career and work,” “research,” “harassment,” and/or “mental health,” as well as the presence of a role model in the workplace who has perceived good work-life balance.ResultsAmong 408 physician-researchers (75% male, mean age 37 yrs), personal burnout scores were slightly higher in women than in men (mean score, 41.9 points vs. 36.7 points, difference, 5.2, 95% confidence interval, 0.5–9.9, p = 0.029), but work-related and patient-related burnout scores did not differ significantly between genders. Over half of women (64%) and men (58%) had a mentor (p = 0.374). In multivariable general linear regression models, personal burnout scores were higher for women (β = 4.98, p = 0.045), and lower among those who had a mentor (β = − 5.82, p = 0.010) and whose workplaces had well-being consultation services (β = − 0.79, p = 0.022). Work-related burnout scores were lower among those with larger amounts of grant funding (β = − 4.70, p = 0.013), a mentor (β = − 6.12, p = 0.002), well-being consultation services (β = − 0.78, p = 0.008) and a role model with a perceived good work-life balance (β = − 4.00, p = 0.038). Patient-related burnout scores were higher among physician-scientists aged older than 37 years (β = 6.25, p = 0.002) and those who had board certification (β = 9.01, p = 0.017), while these scores were lower among those had larger amounts of funding (β = − 5.01, p = 0.006) or a mentor (β = − 5.35, p = 0.006).ConclusionsWorkplace resources and mentorship appear to be associated with lower levels of psychological burnout for both men and women early career physician-scientists.

Federal research funding and academic productivity in pediatric urology: from early career to research independence

Federal grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) are crucial for early career physician-scientists. Federal funding success has been explored in other surgical specialties, but has not been evaluated in pediatric urology. To characterize factors associated with receipt of federal grants, hypothesizing that pediatric urologists who were have advanced research degree(s) were more likely to be federally funded. All pediatric fellowship graduates from 1985-2016 listed on the Societies for Pediatric Urology and institutional websites were queried using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. Primary outcomes were successful receipt of federal grants and transition from mentor-based to independent funding. The secondary outcome was publication rate on PubMed as of November 2017. Covariables included advanced degree(s) (eg, PhD, MPH, MSc, etc), sex, and year of fellowship graduation (1985-2006 versus 2007-2016). Of 445 pediatric urologists (73% male), 36 (8%) were federal grant recipients. Of 18 mentor-based awardees, 9 (50%) transitioned to independent awards. After adjusting for sex and year of fellowship graduation, having an advanced degree(s) was associated with funding success for mentor-based awards (hazard ratio [HR] 3.83 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-12.14], p=0.02; Summary Table) and independent awards (HR 3.11 [1.21-8.02], p=0.02), and with higher publication rates (incident rate ratio [IRR] 2.03 [1.43-2.87], p<0.001). Recent training (2007-2016) was also associated with higher publication rates (IRR 2.70 [2.16-3.37], p<0.001). Among fellowship-trained pediatric urologists in North America between 1985 and 2016, the prevalence of federal grant recipients was 8%. Pediatric urologists who had an advanced educational degree were more likely to be a federally funded grant recipient and have a higher publication rate. Fellowship programs should consider adding opportunities for self-selected applicants to pursue additional research training and degrees.

Impact of Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR Scholarships on Careers of Recipients in Emergency Medicine and on Development of Geriatric Emergency Medicine.

The Jahnigen Career Development Awards program was launched in 2002 with private funding and transformed into the Grants for Early Medical/Surgical Specialists' Transition to Aging Research (GEMSSTAR) program in 2011 through support from the National Institute on Aging and medical specialty professional societies. The Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR program has provided grants to early career physician-scientists from 10 surgical and related medical specialties to initiate and sustain research careers in the geriatric aspect of their discipline. From 2002 to 2016, there were 20 Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR recipients in emergency medicine (EM). The goal of this investigation was to examine the impact of Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR awards on careers of EM recipients and on development of academic geriatric EM. We conducted an online survey of the 20 EM recipients from 2002 to 2016 and analyzed their academic productivity, research impact, career trajectory, and contributions to geriatric EM since receiving the award. All 20 Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR scholars completed the survey. Scholars have published a median of 33 peer-reviewed articles (interquartile range [IQR] = 10-97) since the award, with median annual publication rates of 4.5 (IQR = 1.6-7.0). All scholars had h-indices of 6 or more, with a median of 18 (IQR = 9-28). Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR scholars have served as principal investigator (PI) or co-PI on 126 grants since their award, with 90% having served as PI on at least one additional grant and 30% having received National Institutes of Health Career Development Awards. All scholars reported believing that the Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR was very helpful or helpful for career progress. Most (85%) reported ongoing contributions to geriatric EM in research, education, or administration. After the Jahnigen/GEMSSTAR award, EM scholars have been highly academically productive and successful, and the award has been instrumental in their career development. Awardees have been critical to the development of geriatric EM.

Training the next generation of Canadian Clinician-Scientists: charting a path to success.

Clinician-scientists are physicians with training in both clinical medicine and research that enables them to occupy a unique niche as specialists in basic and translational biomedical research. While there is widespread acknowledgement of the importance of clinician-scientists in today's landscape of evidence-based medical practice, training of clinician-scientists in Canada has been on the decline, with fewer opportunities to obtain funding. With the increasing length of training and lower financial compensation, fewer medical graduates are choosing to pursue such a career. MD-PhD programs, in which trainees receive both medical and research training, have the potential to be an important tool in training the next generation of clinician-scientists; however, MD-PhD trainees in Canada face barriers that include an increase in medical school tuition and a decrease in the amount of financial support. We examined the available data on MD-PhD training in Canada and identified a lack of oversight, a lack of funding and poor mentorship as barriers experienced by MD-PhD trainees. Specific recommendations are provided to begin the process of addressing these challenges, starting with the establishment of an overseeing national body that would track long-term outcome data for MD-PhD trainees. This national body could then function to implement best practices from individual programs across the country and to provide further mentorship and support for early-career physician-scientists. MD-PhD programs have the potential to address Canada's growing shortage of clinician-scientists, and strengthening MD-PhD programs will help to effect positive change.

Helping Basic Scientists Engage With Community Partners to Enrich and Accelerate Translational Research.

Engaging basic scientists in community-based translational research is challenging but has great potential for improving health. In 2009, The Rockefeller University Center for Clinical and Translational Science partnered with Clinical Directors Network, a practice-based research network (PBRN), to create a community-engaged research navigation (CEnR-Nav) program to foster research pairing basic science and community-driven scientific aims. The program is led by an academic navigator and a PBRN navigator. Through meetings and joint activities, the program facilitates basic science-community partnerships and the development and conduct of joint research protocols. From 2009-2014, 39 investigators pursued 44 preliminary projects through the CEnR-Nav program; 25 of those became 23 approved protocols and 2 substudies. They involved clinical scholar trainees, early-career physician-scientists, faculty, students, postdoctoral fellows, and others. Nineteen (of 25; 76%) identified community partners, of which 9 (47%) named them as coinvestigators. Nine (of 25; 36%) included T3-T4 translational aims. Seven (of 25; 28%) secured external funding, 11 (of 25; 44%) disseminated results through presentations or publications, and 5 (71%) of 7 projects publishing results included a community partner as a coauthor. Of projects with long-term navigator participation, 9 (of 19; 47%) incorporated T3-T4 aims and 7 (of 19; 37%) secured external funding. The CEnR-Nav program provides a model for successfully engaging basic scientists with communities to advance and accelerate translational science. This model's durability and generalizability have not been determined, but it achieves valuable short-term goals and facilitates scientifically meaningful community-academic partnerships.

The effect of an intense mentoring program on junior investigators' preparation for a patient-oriented clinical research career.

There is a recognized need to translate scientific discoveries to patient-oriented clinical research (POCR). Several obstacles interfere with the successful recruitment and retention of physicians for POCR careers. The American Society of Hematology developed a yearlong educational and mentoring experience, the Clinical Research Training Institute (CRTI), for early-career physician-scientists from multiple institutions throughout the United States and Canada pursuing POCR careers. Several academic outcome measures of the 140 participants in the first seven years (2003-2010) of CRTI were evaluated by reviewing former trainee participants' curriculum vitae and survey responses. Ethnic, racial, and gender diversity of CRTI trainees was reflective of the proportions represented across U.S. hematology/oncology fellowship programs. Eighty-six percent (109/126) of trainees reported success establishing a POCR study; nearly half (62/126) had primarily research-focused jobs. Former CRTI trainees received at least 262 external grant awards and published 1,035 peer-reviewed manuscripts, 173 chapters, and 115 review articles. Because mentorship is key to developing a successful career, the CRTI program is being modified to enhance longitudinal mentorship by CRTI faculty mentors and mentors at trainees' home institutions, as well as to encourage the establishment of collaborations and the potential for research project success. Efforts to make the CRTI experience available to more phy sicians, include more CRTI graduates as faculty, and increase participation by hematologists from backgrounds under represented in medicine are under way.

Challenges and opportunities for reinvigorating the physician-scientist pipeline.

Physician-scientists, with in-depth training in both medicine and research, are uniquely poised to address pressing challenges at the forefront of biomedicine. In recent years, a number of organizations have outlined obstacles to maintaining the pipeline of physician-scientists, classifying them as an endangered species. As in-training and early-career physician-scientists across the spectrum of the pipeline, we share here our perspective on the current challenges and available opportunities that might aid our generation in becoming independent physician-scientists. These challenges revolve around the difficulties in recruitment and retention of trainees, the length of training and lack of support at key training transition points, and the rapidly and independently changing worlds of medical and scientific training. In an era of health care reform and an environment of increasingly sparse NIH funding, these challenges are likely to become more pronounced and complex. As stakeholders, we need to coalesce behind core strategic points and regularly assess the impact and progress of our efforts with appropriate metrics. Here, we expand on the challenges that we foresee and offer potential opportunities to ensure a more sustainable physician-scientist workforce.

NIH research funding and early career physician scientists: continuing challenges in the 21st century

Physician scientists (researchers with either M.D. or M.D.-Ph.D. degrees) have the unique potential to combine clinical perspectives with scientific insight, and their participation in biomedical research has long been an important topic for policymakers and educators. Given the recent changes in the research environment, an update and extension of earlier studies of this population was needed. Our findings show that physician scientists are less likely to take a major role in biomedical research than they were in the past. The number of physician scientists receiving postdoctoral research training and career development awards is at an all-time low. Physician scientists today, on average, receive their first major research award (R01 equivalent) at a later age than in the 1980s. The number of first-time R01-equivalent awards to physicians is at the same level as it was 30 yr ago, but physicians now represent a smaller percentage of the grant recipients. The long-term decline in the number of physicians entering research careers was temporarily halted during the period of substantial U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget growth (1998–2003). These gains are lost, however, in the subsequent years when NIH budgets failed to keep pace with rising costs.— Garrison, H. H., Deschamps, A. M. NIH research funding and early career physician scientists: continuing challenges in the 21st century.

The Doris Duke Clinical Scientist Development Award

The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation Clinical Scientist Development Award (CSDA) supports early-career physician scientists in their transition to independent research funding. The authors aimed to analyze the characteristics associated with success in CSDA competitions, determine whether attainment of a CSDA is associated with receiving subsequent research funding, and assess whether alumni remain in research. In 2011, the authors tested for associations between gender, age, race/ethnicity, academic degree, National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding rank of the applicant's institution, and success in CSDA competitions. They compared NIH R01 grant attainment, defined as the percentage of individuals who received at least one R01 grant, between CSDA alumni and highly ranked but unsuccessful CSDA applicants (1998-2007). Finally, the authors surveyed alumni to learn more about their professional activities. Demographic factors were not predictors of success in CSDA competitions; academic degree and funding rank of the applicant's institution, however, were. A greater percentage of CSDA alumni than nonalumni received at least one R01 grant (62% [74/120] versus 42% [44/105]). For CSDA alumni who were 10 or more years from the start of their award, their median percent effort toward research activities was 68%. The factors associated with success in a CSDA competition included a combined clinical and doctoral research degree and affiliation with a well-funded institution. More alumni received NIH independent research funding than those who applied but did not receive the award. Thus, the CSDA is associated with physicians establishing independent and recognized research careers.