Program Evaluation of the Research in Academic Pediatrics Initiative on Diversity (RAPID): Impact on Career Development and Professional Society Diversity

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Child Health, and the Pediatric Subspecialty Workforce

Using multiple metrics, the diversity of the pediatric population in the United States is increasing. However, recent data suggest significant disparities in both the prevalence and management of child health conditions cared for by pediatric subspecialists. These inequities occur across multiple dimensions of diversity, including race and ethnicity, country of origin, socioeconomic status, sex and gender, and disability. Research also suggests that attending to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the medical workforce may positively affect health outcomes. High-quality pediatric subspecialty care thus requires knowledge of these data, attention to the effects of social drivers, including racism and discrimination, on health and wellbeing, and interventions to improve pediatric health equity through educational, practice, policy, and research innovations. In this article, we review data on the diversity of the pediatric population and pediatric subspecialty workforce, suggest potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of current diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in academic pediatrics, and provide recommendations across 4 domains: education and training, practice, policy, and future research. The ultimate goal of pediatrics is to improve health equity for all infants, children, adolescents, and young adults cared for in the United States by pediatric subspecialists.

The national institute on drug abuse diversity scholars network: success for a diverse addiction science workforce

There is a well-known lack of diversity in many Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields. The gap in awarded National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants for scientists from underrepresented populations at the early stages of their careers contributes significantly to this lack of diversity. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Diversity Scholars Network (NDSN) program implemented a new model in 2016 to provide support to underrepresented early-career investigators (ECIs) by equipping them to navigate the competitive NIH grant process. NDSN has a demonstrable track record of providing equity through educational opportunities by enhancing the grant funding success of participants. Of 59 participants from 2016 through 2021, 53% received funding within the first two years after completing the program and 69% by four years. NDSN scholars surmount systemic funding barriers by building relationships with scientific coaches, mentors, NIDA Program Officials and intentionally engaging in network building, which all contribute to the funding success of ECIs. NIDA's NDSN program provides a model for retaining underrepresented ECIs that not only benefits individual scholars, but also the institutions they serve and society as a whole.

Ensuring the future of otitis media research: Interest in and feasibility of a mentoring network program within the otitis media research community

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to assess the feasibility of the implementation of a mentoring network program based on expressed interest and the diverse composition of the otitis media research community in order to address attrition of the scientific workforce.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to basic, translational, and clinical researchers with a known interest in otitis media.

RESULTS

Of 509 eligible participants, 119 (23.4%) responded to the survey. Survey respondents had a diverse background by completed education, current job description, and membership in an underrepresented group in science. Most faculty respondents (76.4%) were willing to participate in the proposed program as mentors and faculty lecturers, or had early-career researchers or trainees in their research group who were willing to participate as mentees in the mentoring network. Scientific and non-scientific topics for inclusion in the training program were ranked, with immunology and inflammation, microbiology, science leadership and collaboration, mentoring, and grantsmanship as main foci of interest among respondents.

CONCLUSION

Our survey results showed enthusiastic participation among responding otitis media researchers, indicating the feasibility of implementing a mentoring network program that will address workforce attrition, particularly among underrepresented groups in science.

Diversity in the pediatric research workforce: a scoping review of the literature

The purpose of this scoping review is to determine trends in racial and ethnic representation, identify barriers and facilitators to greater diversity, and assess strategies and interventions to advance diversity among those in the pediatric research workforce in the U.S. We conducted a scoping review of PubMed supplemented with the authors' personal library of papers published from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021. To be eligible, papers had to provide original data, be published in English, report information from a U.S. healthcare institution, and report on outcomes of interest relevant to the child health field. The diversity of faculty has modestly increased over the past decade but reflects a worsening representation compared to overall population trends. This slow increase reflects a loss of diverse faculty and has been referred to as a "leaky pipeline." Strategies to plug the "leaky pipeline" include greater investments in pipeline programs, implementation of holistic review and implicit bias training, development of mentoring and faculty programs targeted to diverse faculty and trainees, alleviation of burdensome administrative tasks, and creation of more inclusive institutional environments. Modest improvements in the racial and ethnic diversity of the pediatric research workforce were identified. However, this reflects worsening overall representation given changing U.S. population demographics. IMPACT: Racial and ethnic diversity in the pediatric research workforce has shown modest increases but worsening overall representation. This review identified barriers and facilitators at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional levels that impact BIPOC trainees and faculty career advancement. Strategies to improve the pathway for BIPOC individuals include greater investments in pipeline and educational programs, implementation of holistic review admissions and bias training, institution of mentoring and sponsorship, alleviation of burdensome administrative responsibilities, and creation of inclusive institutional climates. Future studies should rigorously test the effects of interventions and strategies designed to improve diversity in the pediatric research workforce.

Clinical and Educational Training About Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice for Pediatric Residents

Education and clinical training about diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) is essential for the personal and professional development of pediatric residents in preparation for a career providing health care to diverse pediatric populations. The ability of pediatric residents to reflect on their lived experiences while gaining perspectives about their patients has the potential to positively affect the health care of patients and decrease health inequities. Clinical rotations were established for students from underrepresented populations in medicine as a pathway for matching and diversifying pediatric residency programs with the potential to help diversify the pediatric workforce. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education formulated standards about DEIJ in pediatric residency training. Curricula, internships, and mentoring programs have been created by medical institutions and professional medical organizations to provide learning experiences about DEIJ and foster a sense of belonging. This review article highlights the multifactorial approach needed to achieve the goal of diversifying the pediatric workforce through DEIJ instruction in pediatric residency training. [Pediatr Ann. 2023;52(7):e256-e260.].

Identifying Value Factors in Institutional Leaders' Perspectives on Investing in Health Professions Educators

IMPORTANCE

Investing in educators, educational innovation, and scholarship is essential for excellence in health professions education and health care. Funds for education innovations and educator development remain at significant risk because they virtually never generate offsetting revenue. A broader shared framework is needed to determine the value of such investments.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the value factors using the value measurement methodology domains (individual, financial, operational, social or societal, strategic or political) that health professions leaders placed on educator investment programs, including intramural grants and endowed chairs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with participants from an urban academic health professions institution and its affiliated systems that were conducted between June and September 2019 and were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes with a constructivist orientation. Participants included 31 leaders at multiple levels of the organization (eg, deans, department chairs, and health system leaders) and with a range of experience. Individuals who did not respond initially were followed up with until a sufficient representation of leader roles was achieved.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes include value factors defined by the leaders for educator investment programs across the 5 value measurement methodology domains: individual, financial, operational, social or societal, and strategic or political.

RESULTS

This study included 29 leaders (5 [17%] campus or university leaders; 3 [10%] health systems leaders; 6 [21%] health professions school leaders; 15 [52%] department leaders). They identified value factors across the 5 value measurement methods domains. Individual factors emphasized the impact on faculty career, stature, and personal and professional development. Financial factors included tangible support, the ability to attract additional resources, and the importance of these investments as a monetary input rather than output. Operational factors identified educational programs and faculty recruitment or retention. Social and societal factors showcased scholarship and dissemination benefits to the external community beyond the organization and to the internal community of faculty, learners, and patients. Strategic and political factors highlighted impact on culture and symbolism, innovation, and organizational success.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that health sciences and health system leaders find value in funding educator investment programs in multiple domains beyond direct financial return on investment. These value factors can inform program design and evaluation, effective feedback to leaders, and advocacy for future investments. This approach can be used by other institutions to identify context-specific value factors.

Clinician-Scientist Faculty Mentoring Program (FAME) - A New Inclusive Training Model at Penn State Increases Scholarly Productivity and Extramural Grant Funding

PURPOSE

Clinician-scientists have a high attrition rate at the junior-faculty level, before they gain independent funding. We identified the lack of skill set, clinician-scientist community and collaboration between clinician-scientists and clinicians with predominantly clinical duties, as key problems in our medium-size college of medicine.

METHODS

We designed a novel two-year educational program, the Clinician-scientist Faculty Mentoring program (FAME) specifically to target junior clinician-scientists. The program enrollment included both lab-based, "traditional" and "non-traditional" clinician-scientists, with predominantly clinical duties and limited time for research. The curriculum included the novel educational tools: Emerging technology seminars and mentored work-in-progress research seminars, integrated with mock grant review.

RESULTS

The first class enrolled 17 clinician-scientists with diverse clinical subspecialty, previous research training, and protected research time. After two years in the program, the self-assessment of FAME scholars demonstrated strong improvement in grantsmanship skills, career development, emerging technologies, and the sense of community and collaboration. Compared to the period before initiating FAME, scholars increased annual scholarly output by 65% and new extramural funding by >20-fold ($0.189 vs $4.0 million) following completion of FAME. The "traditional" clinician-scientists, who had >50% research time, increased new extramural funding by ~25-fold ($0.134 vs $3.336 million), whereas "non-traditional" clinician-scientists who had ≤50% research time increased new extramural funding by >13-fold.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that a training program tailored specifically to clinician-scientists leads to increased scholarly productivity and grant funding regardless of research background. Implementing this type of training program nationally, with inclusion of clinician-scientists with various amounts of protected time for research, will help both "traditional" and "non-traditional" clinician-scientists to obtain a substantial independent extramural funding, fulfill their scholarly potential, and enhance their sense of community. Our model would be particularly useful for small-to-medium sized academic institutions, who have a limited clinician-scientist workforce facing competing health care system needs.

Addressing Social Determinants of Health and Mitigating Health Disparities Across the Lifespan in Congenital Heart Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Despite the overall improvement in life expectancy of patients living with congenital heart disease (congenital HD), disparities in morbidity and mortality remain throughout the lifespan. Longstanding systemic inequities, disparities in the social determinants of health, and the inability to obtain quality lifelong care contribute to poorer outcomes. To work toward health equity in populations with congenital HD, we must recognize the existence and strategize the elimination of inequities in overall congenital HD morbidity and mortality, disparate health care access, and overall quality of health services in the context of varying social determinants of health, systemic inequities, and structural racism. This requires critically examining multilevel contributions that continue to facilitate health inequities in the natural history and consequences of congenital HD. In this scientific statement, we focus on population, systemic, institutional, and individual‐level contributions to health inequities from prenatal to adult congenital HD care. We review opportunities and strategies for improvement in lifelong congenital HD care based on current public health and scientific evidence, surgical data, experiences from other patient populations, and recognition of implicit bias and microaggressions. Furthermore, we review directions and goals for both quantitative and qualitative research approaches to understanding and mitigating health inequities in congenital HD care. Finally, we assess ways to improve the diversity of the congenital HD workforce as well as ethical guidance on addressing social determinants of health in the context of clinical care and research.

Changing Who Has a Seat and Voice at the Table: How the Academic Pediatric Association is Responding to Systemic Racism

The Academic Pediatrics Association has taken multiple steps over the last 2 years to incorporate the lenses of anti-racism and social justice into our mission and work. In this commentary, we discuss the creation and work of the Anti-Racism and Diversity Task Force, which was charged by the Academic Pediatrics Association's Board of Directors with identifying strategies to promote anti-racism and advance the diversity, equity and inclusion agenda.

Faculty Recruitment, Retention, and Representation in Leadership: An Evidence-Based Guide to Best Practices for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion from the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine

Improving the recruitment, retention, and leadership advancement of faculty who are under-represented in medicine is a priority at many academic institutions to ensure excellence in patient care, research, and health equity. Here we provide a critical review of the literature and offer evidence-based guidelines for faculty recruitment, retention, and representation in leadership. Recommendations for recruitment include targeted recruitment to expand the candidate pool with diverse candidates, holistic review of applications, and incentivizing stakeholders for success with diversity efforts. Retention efforts should establish a culture of inclusivity, promote faculty development, and evaluate for biases in the promotion and tenure process. We believe this guide will be valuable for all leaders and faculty members seeking to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in their institutions.

Career Development Program for Underrepresented in Medicine Scholars in Academic Neurology: TRANSCENDS

BACKGROUND

The Training in Research for Academic Neurologists to Sustain Careers and Enhance the Numbers of Diverse Scholars (TRANSCENDS) program is a career advancement opportunity for individuals underrepresented in biomedical research funded by the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke and American Academy of Neurology (AAN).

OBJECTIVE

To report on qualitative and quantitative outcomes in TRANSCENDS.

DESIGN

Early career individuals (neurology fellows and junior faculty) from groups underrepresented in medicine (UIM) were competitively selected from a national pool of applicants (2016-2019). TRANSCENDS activities comprised an online Clinical Research degree program, monthly webinars, AAN meeting activities, and mentoring. Participants were surveyed during and after completion of TRANSCENDS to evaluate program components.

OUTCOMES

Of 23 accepted scholars (comprising 4 successive cohorts), 56% were women, 61% Hispanic/Latinx, 30% Black/African American, and 30% assistant professors. To date, 48% have graduated the TRANSCENDS program and participants have published 180 peer-reviewed articles. Mentees' feedback noted that professional skills development (i.e., manuscript and grant writing), networking opportunities, and mentoring were the most beneficial elements of the program. Stated opportunities for improvement included incorporating a mentor-the-mentor workshop, providing more transitional support for mentees in the next stage of their careers, and requiring mentees to provide quarterly reports.

CONCLUSIONS

TRANSCENDS is a feasible program for supporting UIM neurologists towards careers in research and faculty academic appointments attained thus far have been sustained. Although longer-term outcomes and process enhancements are warranted, programs like this may help increase the numbers of diverse academic neurologists and further drive neurologic innovation.

The Physician-Investigator Workforce: Looking Ahead

Support of the U.S. health professions investigator workforce is critically important to the continued advancement of health care nationally. Physician-investigators comprise one segment of this health professions investigator workforce, which also includes investigators in the nursing, pharmacy, and dentistry professions, and others. Among physician health professionals in particular, the term "physician-investigator" has been described as encompassing physicians engaged in research in various ways including "clinical researchers" (physicians with clinical duties who do clinical, patient-centered research), "clinician-scientists" (physicians with clinical roles who perform research in laboratories or using computational tools), and "physician-scientists" (physicians focused on research with little or no clinical activity). Broadly defined, physician-investigators are included in various groups of researchers described in several articles recently published in Academic Medicine; these articles provide details on a range of approaches, with supporting outcomes data, being taken to train, support, and retain physicians in the health professions investigator workforce. The authors of this commentary examine selected literature, including several articles in this issue among others, along with Association of American Medical Colleges data, to offer observations about programs that train physician-investigators. Evidence-informed single-program approaches for early-career researchers can sustain continued research interest and foster the career development of the emerging physician-investigator workforce. Collaborative multi-institutional approaches offer the benefit of multisite work to power outcomes studies and to increase generalizability beyond a specific institutional program. System-wide institutional approaches may be particularly critical in supporting physician-investigators across all career stages. Although the articles discussed in this commentary are largely (although not exclusively) focused on various initiatives and programs designed to develop and sustain the physician-investigator workforce, such initiatives and programs may have value in addressing shared challenges of developing, supporting, and retaining the broader investigator workforce across all health professions.

Mentoring New and Early-Stage Investigators and Underrepresented Minority Faculty for Research Success in Health-Related Fields: An Integrative Literature Review (2010-2020)

Mentoring to develop research skills is an important strategy for facilitating faculty success. The purpose of this study was to conduct an integrative literature review to examine the barriers and facilitators to mentoring in health-related research, particularly for three categories: new investigators (NI), early-stage investigators (ESI) and underrepresented minority faculty (UMF). PsychINFO, CINAHL and PubMed were searched for papers published in English from 2010 to 2020, and 46 papers were reviewed. Most papers recommended having multiple mentors and many recommended assessing baseline research skills. Barriers and facilitators were both individual and institutional. Individual barriers mentioned most frequently were a lack of time and finding work-life balance. UMF mentioned barriers related to bias, discrimination and isolation. Institutional barriers included lack of mentors, lack of access to resources, and heavy teaching and service loads. UMF experienced institutional barriers such as devaluation of experience or expertise. Individual facilitators were subdivided and included writing and synthesis as technical skills, networking and collaborating as interpersonal skills, and accountability, leadership, time management, and resilience/grit as personal skills. Institutional facilitators included access to mentoring, professional development opportunities, and workload assigned to research. Advocacy for diversity and cultural humility were included as unique interpersonal and institutional facilitators for UMF. Several overlapping and unique barriers and facilitators to mentoring for research success for NI, ESI and UMF in the health-related disciplines are presented.