Survey Says: "COVID-19 Lockdown Hits Young Faculty and Clinical Trials"

Enhancing Efficiency and Reach Using Facebook to Recruit Breast Cancer Survivors for a Telephone-Based Supportive Care Randomized Trial During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

Evidence supporting social media-based recruitment of cancer survivors is limited. This paper describes how we used Facebook during the COVID-19 pandemic to augment our recruitment of breast cancer survivors for our two-site telephone-based randomized clinical trial (RCT) at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

METHODS

Originally a two-site RCT of a telephone-delivered breast cancer survivorship intervention, we extended our clinic-based recruitment to Facebook. Participant characteristics, geographic reach, and baseline outcomes were compared across recruitment sources (ie, two clinics and Facebook) using descriptive statistics and effect sizes.

RESULTS

Enrollment rates (20%-29%) were comparable across recruitment sources. The 21-month Facebook marketing campaign accounted for 59% (n = 179/303) of our total sample and had the greatest geographic reach, recruiting women from 24 states. The Facebook campaign reached a total of 51,787 unique individuals and cost $88.44 in US dollars (USD) per enrolled participant. Clinic samples had a greater proportion of women who were widowed (8% v 1%; P = .03) and Facebook had a higher proportion of women with a household income over $40,000 USD (83% v 71%; P = .02). There were no statistically significant differences between Facebook and the two clinics on baseline survey scores.

CONCLUSION

Augmenting traditional recruitment with Facebook increased our RCT's geographic and sociodemographic reach and supported meeting recruitment goals in a timely way. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer survivorship researchers should consider using social media as a recruitment strategy while weighing the advantages and potential biases introduced through such strategies.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) researchers in India

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the nationally mandated lockdown has resulted in facility closures, decreased laboratory activities, and shifting to remote working. The effects of the pandemic have spread across all professions, including academia. Hence, the present study aims to understand the extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) researchers and stakeholders in India. Methods: The study employed a mixed method design. Both quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interview) methods were used to gain a comprehensive understanding on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) early career researchers (ECRs), graduate students, Heads of Institutes, suppliers of scientific equipment, funders, and other stakeholders in India. Results: A total of 618 researchers completed the survey, and 24 stakeholders were interviewed for this study. Our findings highlight the importance of institutional and social support for mental well-being and scientific productivity among researchers, especially during the pandemic. It also shows the impact of the disruptions in grant disbursals on research activities of scientists. Further, the gendered impact between these relationships was also noted, all of which hint at a need for structured reform within STEM. Conclusions: The study highlights the various challenges faced by early career researchers, and STEM scientists at various positions in their careers during the COVID-19 restrictions in India.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Research Career Advancement of Health Equity Scholars from Diverse Backgrounds

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly taxed scientific research and seems to have exacerbated existing inequities within the research field, particularly for early-stage investigators (ESIs). This study examines the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on traditionally underrepresented ESIs enrolled in an NIH-supported study evaluating the effectiveness of developmental networks, grant writing coaching, and mentoring on research career advancement. The survey consisted of 24 closed-ended (quantitative) and 4 open-ended questions (qualitative) linked to a participant's ability to meet grant submission deadlines, research and professional development disruptions, stress level, career transition level, self-efficacy and management of scholarly tasks, and familial responsibilities. Results from 32 respondents (53%) suggest that COVID-19 adversely impacted the continuity of research (81%) and grant submissions (63%). On average, grant submissions were delayed by 6.69 months (i.e., greater than one grant cycle). We also conducted additional analyses characterizing nonresponse and found that there were no significant predictors of nonresponse, indicating a limited threat to the validity of our findings. The disruption caused by COVID-19 to the careers of ESIs from underrepresented groups in the biomedical workforce has been profound in the short term. The long-term consequences to the future success of these groups are unknown but is a worthwhile area of research and potential innovation.

Training and cultivating the translational science workforce: Responses of Clinical and Translational Science Awards program hubs to the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically changed our lives and the delivery of healthcare. The pandemic also led to widespread disruption in the research activities and training of pre-doctoral, post-doctoral, and early career faculty researchers. This mini-review uses the Local Adaptive Capacity Framework to describe successful practices, challenges, and lessons learned on how Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs have used their expertise, resources, and collaborations to advance clinical and translational science research and workforce development while facing and adapting to a pandemic. Data for this mini-review were taken from the scientific literature (23 articles) and the Research Performance Progress Reports of 50 unique CTSA hubs (40 TL1 and 50 KL2 awards). Institutions responded in innovative ways to the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic. Electronic and virtual platforms were used to overcome challenges related to physical distancing, laboratory closures, and travel bans. The importance of mentorship and well-being led to the creation of new virtual programs to expand mentoring and networking beyond the home institution and to promote well-being and resilience. These solutions to translational workforce development can be implemented to address future public health emergencies.

Early-Career Complementologists (ECCO) - Past achievements and future directions

The Early-Career Complementologists (ECCO) is a task force that was established, in close collaboration with the European Complement Network (ECN) and the International Complement Society (ICS), with the specific mission to support and connect early-career researchers (ECRs) in the complement field. ECRs are junior scientists at the early stages of their training which include undergraduate as well as graduate students, Ph.D. graduates, and post-doctoral fellows. This unique population within the scientific community represents the next generation of scientific leaders. However, ECRs are faced with key challenges and the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted them. In this paper, we provide further insight into specific needs and challenges of ECRs in the complement field. We surveyed 52 ECRs in the complement field and assessed their perceptions of 1) mentor and peer support, 2) working conditions as well as 3) career interests and prospects. Furthermore, we review the various activities carried out by ECCO over the past years such as our social media presence, social events, and newly-created awards. We also discuss the future activities and events to be carried out by ECCO. Through these initiatives and activities, ECCO strives to boost collaborations between ECRs, provide recognition, and improve the visibility of their work. In addition, continuous joint efforts must also be made by the scientific community, research institutes, and funding organizations to nurture and invest in ECRs.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the conduct of clinical trials: a quantitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Globally, healthcare has shouldered much of the socioeconomic brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic leading to numerous clinical trials suspended or discontinued.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the COVID-19 impact on the number of clinical trials worldwide.

METHODS

Data deposited by 219 countries in the ClinicalTrials.gov database (2007-2020) were interrogated using targeted queries. A time series model was fitted to the data for studies ongoing, initiated, or ended between 2007 Quarter (Q) 1 and 2019 Q4 to predict the expected trials number in 2020 in the COVID-19 absence. The predicted values were compared with the actual 2020 data to quantify the pandemic impact.

RESULTS

The ongoing registered trials number grew from 2007 Q1 (33,739) to 2019 Q4 (80,319). By contrast, there were markedly fewer ongoing trials in all four quarters of 2020 compared with forecasted values (1.6%-2.8% decrease). When excluding COVID-19-related studies, this disparity grew further (3.4%-5.8% decrease), to a peak of almost 5,000 fewer ongoing trials than estimated for 2020 Q2. The initiated non-COVID-19 trials number was higher than predicted in 2020 Q4 (9.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

This pandemic has impacted clinical trials. Provided that current trends persist, clinical trial activities may soon recover to at least pre-COVID-19 levels.

Impact of the Pandemic on the Teaching and Research Staff at a Technological University in Spain: Deepening the Gender Gap

The alteration of the educational model caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has not affected all university faculty equally. This work explores the academic, digital and gender inequalities caused by the pandemic on the teaching and research staff of a technological university for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) disciplines in Spain, the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya—BarcelonaTech (UPC). The study considers an anonymous survey with a non-probabilistic voluntary sample (n = 355). The results of the survey reveal that, over these months, the teaching and research staff of the university, regardless of gender, has significantly increased its academic activity due especially to the number of hours devoted to virtual teaching compared to its teaching dedication in a situation of normalcy. This study shows that the lockdown has strongly affected women who are more vulnerable to crisis. In particular, the negative impact on research has been higher in female faculty staff from the UPC, who already face disparities regarding promotion and, during lockdown, stated more difficulties with household work reconciliation. From the results of this study, it is possible to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic has deepened the gender gap in the academic field.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) researchers in India

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the nationally mandated lockdown has resulted in facility closures, decreased laboratory activities, and shifting to remote working. The effects of the pandemic have spread across all professions, including academia. Hence, the present study aims to understand the extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) researchers and stakeholders in India. Methods: The study employed a mixed method design. Both quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interview) methods were used to gain a comprehensive understanding on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) early career researchers (ECRs), graduate students, Heads of Institutes, suppliers of scientific equipment, funders, and other stakeholders in India. Results: A total of 618 researchers completed the survey, and 24 stakeholders were interviewed for this study. Our findings highlight the importance of institutional and social support for mental well-being and scientific productivity among researchers, especially during the pandemic. It also shows the impact of the disruptions in grant disbursals on research activities of scientists. Further, the gendered impact between these relationships was also noted, all of which hint at a need for structured reform within STEM. Conclusions: The study highlights the various challenges faced by early career researchers, and STEM scientists at various positions in their careers during the COVID-19 restrictions in India.

Experiences of student and trainee autism researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic

Circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in significant personal and professional adjustments. Students and trainees, including those in autism research, face unique challenges to accomplishing their training and career goals during this unprecedented time. In this commentary, we, as members of the International Society for Autism Research Student and Trainee Committee, describe our personal experiences, which may or may not align with those of other students and trainees. Our experiences have varied both in terms of the ease (or lack thereof) with which we adapted and the degree to which we were supported in the transition to online research and clinical practice. We faced and continue to adjust to uncertainties about future training and academic positions, for which opportunities have been in decline and have subsequently negatively impacted our mental health. Students and trainees' prospects have been particularly impacted compared to more established researchers and faculty. In addition to the challenges we have faced, however, there have also been unexpected benefits in our training during the pandemic, which we describe here. We have learned new coping strategies which, we believe, have served us well. The overarching goal of this commentary is to describe these experiences and strategies in the hope that they will benefit the autism research community moving forward. Here, we provide a set of recommendations for faculty, especially mentors, to support students and trainees as well as strategies for students and trainees to bolster their self-advocacy, both of which we see as crucial for our future careers. LAY SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected students and trainees, including those in autism research, in different ways. Here, we describe our personal experiences. These experiences include challenges. For example, it has been difficult to move from in-person to online work. It has also been difficult to keep up with work and training goals. Moreover, working from home has made it hard to connect with our supervisors and mentors. As a result, many of us have felt unsure about how to make the best career choices. Working in clinical services and getting to know and support our patients online has also been challenging. Overall, the pandemic has made us feel more isolated and some of us have struggled to cope with that. On the other hand, our experiences have also included benefits. For example, by working online, we have been able to join meetings all over the world. Also, the pandemic has pushed us to learn new skills. Those include technical skills but also skills for well-being. Next, we describe our experiences of returning to work. Finally, we give recommendations for trainees and supervisors on how to support each other and to build a strong community.

Recruiting underrepresented individuals in a double pandemic: Lessons learned in a randomized control trial

The Building Up Trial is a cluster-randomized trial that aims to address the issue of the leaky career pathway for underrepresented (UR) faculty in biomedical fields. Regulatory approval and recruitment for the Building Up Trial took place during the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-racism movement. The pandemic and anti-racism movement personally and professionally impacted the target population and made recruitment challenging at both the institution and participant level. The target sample size for this study was 208 postdoctoral fellows or early-career faculty across 26 predominately white institutions. Challenges and adaptations are described. The Building Up Trial was delayed by 3 months. In total, 225 participants from 26 institutions were enrolled. Participants are predominately female (80%), Hispanic/Latinx (34%) or non-Hispanic/Latinx Black (33%), and early-career faculty (53%). At the institution level, obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval through a single Institutional Review Board (sIRB) posed the biggest challenge. We adapted to COVID-19-related challenges through simplifying sIRB forms, modifying study practices, and increasing communication with institutions. Recruiting UR postdoctoral fellows and faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic and anti-racism movement was challenging but not impossible. Studies should be prepared to modify study and recruitment policies to overcome additional barriers posed by the pandemics.

Mitigating losses: how scientific organisations can help address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on early-career researchers

Scientific collaborations among nations to address common problems and to build international partnerships as part of science diplomacy is a well-established notion. The international flow of people and ideas has played an important role in the advancement of the 'Sciences' and the current pandemic scenario has drawn attention towards the genuine need for a stronger role of science diplomacy, science advice and science communication. In dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, visible interactions across science, policy, science communication to the public and diplomacy worldwide have promptly emerged. These interactions have benefited primarily the disciplines of knowledge that are directly informing the pandemic response, while other scientific fields have been relegated. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists of all disciplines and from all world regions are discussed here, with a focus on early-career researchers (ECRs), as a vulnerable population in the research system. Young academies and ECR-driven organisations could suggest ECR-powered solutions and actions that could have the potential to mitigate these effects on ECRs working on disciplines not related to the pandemic response. In relation with governments and other scientific organisations, they can have an impact on strengthening and creating fairer scientific systems for ECRs at the national, regional, and global level.

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.

COVID-19 and the academy: opinions and experiences of university-based scientists in the U.S

Much of the available evidence regarding COVID-19 effects on the scientific community in the U.S. is anecdotal and non-representative. We report findings from a based survey of university-based biologists, biochemists, and civil and environmental engineers regarding negative and positive COVID-19 impacts, respondent contributions to addressing the pandemic, and their opinions regarding COVID-19 research policies. The most common negative impact was university closures, cited by 93% of all scientists. Significant subgroup differences emerged, with higher proportions of women, assistant professors, and scientists at institutions located in COVID-19 "hotspot" counties reporting difficulties concentrating on research. Assistant professors additionally reported facing more unanticipated childcare responsibilities. Approximately half of the sample also reported one or more positive COVID-19 impacts, suggesting the importance of developing a better understanding of the complete range of impacts across all fields of science. Regarding COVID-19 relevant public policy, findings suggest divergence of opinion concerning surveillance technologies and the need to alter federal approval processes for new tests and vaccines.

Challenges in PhD education due to COVID-19 - disrupted supervision or business as usual: a cross-sectional survey of Swedish biomedical sciences graduate students

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear to what extent the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the normal progression of biomedical and medical science graduate programs and if there was a lasting impact on the quality and quantity of supervision of PhD-students. To date, multiple editorials and commentaries indicate the severity of the disruption without providing sufficient evidence with quantifiable data.

METHODS

An online survey was submitted to the administrative offices of biomedical and medical PhD-programs at eight major universities in Sweden to gauge the impact of the pandemic on the students. It consisted of multiple-choice and open-ended questions where students could provide examples of positive and/or negative supervision strategies. Open answered questions were coded as either examples of positive or negative support.

RESULTS

PhD students were divided into two groups: those with improved or unchanged supervision during the pandemic (group 1, n = 185), versus those whose supervision worsened (group 2, n = 69). Group 1 received more help from supervisors and more frequent supervision via both online and alternative platforms (email/messages and telephone). There was no significant difference in educational-stage, gender or caretaking responsibilities between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important for the scientific community to learn how to provide the best possible supervision for PhD students during the pandemic. Our data suggests that more frequent supervision, and using a diverse array of meeting platforms is helpful. In addition, it is important for the students to feel that they have their supervisor's emotional support. Several students also expressed that they would benefit from an extension of their PhD programs due to delays caused by the pandemic.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on registered interventional clinical trials

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has led to a dramatic impact worldwide and presented unprecedented challenges for clinical and translational medicine. We assess the impact of COVID‐19 on submitted and completed interventional clinical trials that have been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. After classifying over 85% of the registered clinical trials by their source, we carefully model the number of submitted and completed trials before and after March 2020. Overall, we find minimal impact of COVID‐19 on the number of submitted clinical trials, although a much more substantial impact is observed for completed clinical trials. We also show that clinical trials with a pharmaceutical sponsor were more successful at completing trials during the pandemic compared to the trials with academic/hospital/government sponsors.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Ovarian Cancer Management: Adjusting to the New Normal

COVID-19, also known as the coronavirus disease 2019, is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) declared pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). As the world faces the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis, the oncology community is being impacted by unprecedented challenges. During this trying time, patients with ovarian cancer (OC) have been affected by a delay in diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy and radiation treatments, and oncology follow-ups being conducted via telemedicine instead of in-person visits. OC patients and their oncologists are balancing the fears of COVID-19 and cancer treatment with the consequences of delaying cancer care. The delay in treatment care that women with OC are experiencing has resulted in higher levels of cancer worry, anxiety, and depression. In this article, we succinctly review the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment and ongoing clinical trials of OC. We also discuss the psychological effects of COVID-19 on women with OC and alternative therapeutic strategies to limit in-person hospital visits to reduce the spread of the disease, and the impact of COVID-19 on OC patients.