Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success

Prioritizing mental health support for physician-scientist trainees

Tuazon et al. highlight the mental health challenges facing physician-scientist trainees, who have a dual commitment to advancing clinical care and undertaking research. The authors outline the critical gaps in mental health support structures available to this unique trainee population and provide recommendations to redress the concerns discussed.

Trends in Specialty Training and National Institutes of Health Funding Among Surgeon-Scientists

Purpose

To determine if dual-degree training [ie, completion of a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded MD/PhD program], among other professional development and demographic variables, predicted academic productivity (eg, K-to-R conversion, number of publications, etc.) among early-career surgeon-scientists.

Methods

We analyzed publicly available data from the National MD/PhD Program Outcomes Study and the Association of American Medical Colleges Graduate Medical Education Track database to identify trends in the number and proportion of MD/PhD graduates pursuing surgical specialties. NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool Expenditures and Results was interrogated to identify a cohort of early-career academic surgeon-scientists receiving K-awards from 2011 to 2021.

Results

The total number of MD/PhD program graduates completing Graduate Medical Education training increased each decade after the Medical Scientist Training Program was established by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, but the proportion completing surgical specialties did not change significantly (P = 0.96) from 1965 to 2014. More recent residency match trends demonstrate an increase in both the proportion and number of MD/PhD graduates entering surgical specialties, with 21.5% entering surgical residency training in 2020. Among 476 early-career academic surgeon-scientists receiving K-awards at 70 institutions, 27% were faculty members at only 4 universities, suggesting that federally funded surgeon-scientists are concentrated at a small number of institutions. Although MD/PhD graduates represented only 2.3% of active surgical residents from 2011 to 2020, they constituted a much higher fraction of K-awardees (29%). Of 296 surgeon-scientists who completed K-awards, 35% successfully obtained an R01-equivalent award.

Conclusions

These findings emphasize the need for comprehensive career development and institutional resources to support early-career surgeon-scientists.

More women than ever are entering MD-PhD programs. What lies ahead for them?

The earliest MD-PhD programs were small and enrolled mostly men. Here, we show that since 2014 there has been a steady increase in the number of women in MD-PhD programs, the number of women reaching parity with men in 2023. This change was due to an increase in female applicants, a decrease in male applicants, and an increase in the acceptance rate for women, which had previously been lower than that for men. Data from the National MD-PhD Program Outcomes Study show that training duration has been similar for men and women, as have most choices of medical specialties and workplaces. However, women were less likely to have full-time faculty appointments, fewer had NIH grants, and those in the most recent graduation cohort at the time of the survey reported spending less time on research than men. Previously cited reasons for these differences include disproportionate childcare responsibilities, a paucity of role models, insufficient recognition, and gender bias. Institutions can and should address these obstacles, but training programs can help by preparing their graduates to succeed despite the systemic obstacles. The alternative is a persistent gender gap in the physician-scientist workforce, lost opportunities to benefit from diverse perspectives, and a diminished impact of valuable training resources.

Changes in self-confidence in professional, personal, and scientific skills by gender during physician-scientist training at the University of Pittsburgh

Introduction

Persistence in physician-scientist careers has been suboptimal, particularly among women. There is a gender gap in self-confidence in medicine. We measured the impact of our physician-scientist training programs on trainee's confidence in professional, personal, and scientific competencies, using a survey measuring self-rated confidence in 36 competencies across two timepoints.

Methods

Results were analyzed for the full survey and for thematic subscales identified through exploratory factor analysis (EFA). A mixed effects linear model and a difference in differences (DID) design were used to assess the differential impact of the programing by gender and career level.

Results

Analysis included 100 MD-PhD or MD-only medical student or resident/fellow trainees enrolled between 2020 and 2023. Five subscales were identified through EFA; career sustainability, science productivity, grant management, goal setting, and goal alignment (Cronbach's alpha 0.85-0.94). Overall, mean scores increased significantly for all five subscales. Women significantly increased their confidence levels in all five areas, whereas men increased only in science productivity and grant management. Mixed effects models showed significant increases over time for women compared to men in career sustainability and goal alignment. Residents and fellows had greater increases than medical students across all subscales.

Conclusion

Physician-scientist trainees fellows increased their confidence in personal, professional, and scientific skills during training. Training had a greater impact on women than men in building confidence in sustaining careers and aligning their goals with professional and institutional priorities. The magnitude of increased confidence among residents and fellows exceeded that in medical students.

Career trajectories of MD-PhD physician scientists: The loss of women investigators

Advances in biomedical research require a robust physician scientist workforce. Despite being equally successful at securing early career awards from the NIH as men, women MD-PhD physician scientists are less likely to serve as principal investigators on mid- and later careers awards. Here, we discuss the causes of gender disparities in academic medicine, the implications of losing highly trained women physician scientists, and the institutional and systemic changes needed to sustain this pool of talented investigators.