Impact of COVID-19 on early career scientists: an optimistic guide for the future

Scientific priorities and relational dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study

To rapidly respond to the COVID-19 public health crisis, researchers have been called upon to prioritize pandemic research, while simultaneously modifying their existing research to maintain the safety of all stakeholders. This study aims to explore the experiences of health science researchers in their scientific practices, research priorities, and professional relational dynamics due to COVID-19. Specifically, we interviewed 31 researchers from diverse fields at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Participants worked on COVID-19, non-COVID-19 related research, or both. We integrated inductive and deductive coding using a thematic coding method. The following four themes were explored: 1) impact of research, 2) research priorities, 3) professional relationships and 4) contextual influences on science. Participants were drawn to COVID-19 work for a diversity of reasons including social need, scientific interest, professional duty, and increased access to funding opportunities. While collaborations have increased for COVID-19 researchers, interpersonal relationships have been challenging for participants. Additionally, political, familial, and personal stresses due to the pandemic have taken a toll on researchers in very different and often inequitable ways. To ensure team cohesion, there is a need to develop research practices, policies and systems that value empathy, flexibility, and interdependence.

Students at a crossroad: A cross-sectional survey gauging the impact of COVID-19 on medical and biomedical graduates in the United States and Sweden

Graduate programs in medicine and biomedical sciences have been severely impacted by the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic over the last 2 years. Following 2 years since beginning of the pandemic, data on student support, educational and academic performance as well as sentiment on changes to educational programs are starting to emerge. We performed and compared results of two cross-sectional surveys of Swedish and U.S.-based medical and biomedical graduate students on how the pandemic has affected their studies, research productivity and career trajectory. Students were also asked to assess support provided by the university and supervisors. The surveys also captured student demographics and a range of other factors, such as pressures brought on by caretaking and financial responsibilities. We analyzed answers from 264 and 106 students attending graduate programs in universities in Sweden and the United States, respectively. U.S.-based students faced more severe restrictions on their research program compared to students in Sweden, reporting more delays in productivity, scientific output and graduation, and increased worries about their career trajectory. Swedish students had more caretaking responsibilities, although these did not cause any delays in graduation. While support by universities and supervisors was comparable between the countries, financial worries and mental health concerns were particularly prominent in the U.S. cohort. Student performance and outlook was hugely dependent on the breadth of the restrictions and the available support. Besides the governmental and university-led approach to counter the pandemic, societal differences also played a role in how well students were handling effects of the pandemic.

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.

Collateral damage: has the COVID-19 pandemic more strongly impacted medical research than other scientific areas?

The principle of resource allocation states that diversion of resources to attend a function may compromise others. The COVID-19 pandemic required a rapid response with a justifiable relocation of equipment, funds and human resources. Based on the ecological principle of allocation, we tested whether the relocation of resources to support COVID-19 research was more detrimental to medical research than to research in other scientific areas. We compared the yearly number of published articles from 2015 to 2021 using disease-related keywords and non-medical scientific keywords. Contrary to the expectation, we found an abrupt reduction in the publication rates in all research areas from 2019 to 2020 or 2021, compared to the pre-pandemic period (2015-2019). The allocation effect on medical research may be overshadowed by stronger effects of the pandemic, or it may become evident in the coming years. The drastic reduction in published papers could have negative consequences for scientific advancements, including understanding and curing diseases other than COVID-19 that strongly affect humanity.

Creating connections: developing an online space for cross-regional mentorship and network building in the dementia research field

Background

Effective development and retention of talented early-career researchers (ECRs) is essential to the continued success of biomedical science research fields. To this end, formal mentorship programmes (where researchers are paired with one or more mentors beyond their direct manager) have proven to be successful in providing support and expanding career development opportunities. However, many programmes are limited to pools of mentors and mentees within one institute or geographical area, highlighting that cross-regional connections may be a missed opportunity in many mentorship schemes.

Methods

Here, we aimed to address this limitation through our pilot cross-regional mentorship scheme, creating reciprocal mentor-mentee pairings between two pre-established networks of Alzheimer's Research UK (ARUK) Network-associated researchers. We carefully created 21 mentor-mentee pairings between the Scotland and University College London (UCL) networks in 2021, with surveys conducted to assess mentor/mentee satisfaction with the programme.

Results

Participants reported very high satisfaction with the nature of the pairings and the mentors' contribution to the career development of mentees; a majority also reported that the mentorship scheme increased their connections outside of their home network. Our assessment of this pilot programme is that it supports the utility of cross-regional mentorship schemes for ECR development. At the same time, we highlight the limitations of our programme and recommend areas for improvement in future programmes, including greater consideration of support for minoritized groups and the need for additional training for mentors.

Conclusions

In conclusion, our pilot scheme generated successful and novel mentor-mentee pairings across pre-existing networks; both of which reported high satisfaction with pairings, ECR career and personal development, and the formation of new cross-network connections. This pilot may serve as a model for other networks of biomedical researchers, where existing networks within medical research charities can act as a scaffold to build new cross-regional career development opportunities for researchers.

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.

Trends of research productivity across author gender and research fields: A multidisciplinary and multi-country observational study

Bibliographic properties of more than 75 million scholarly articles, are examined and trends in overall research productivity are analysed as a function of research field (over the period of 1970–2020) and author gender (over the period of 2006–2020). Potential disruptive effects of the Covid-19 pandemic are also investigated. Over the last decade (2010–2020), the annual number of publications have invariably increased every year with the largest relative increase in a single year happening in 2019 (more than 6% relative growth). But this momentum was interrupted in 2020. Trends show that Environmental Sciences and Engineering Environmental have been the fastest growing research fields. The disruption in patterns of scholarly publication due to the Covid-19 pandemic was unevenly distributed across fields, with Computer Science, Engineering and Social Science enduring the most notable declines. The overall trends of male and female productivity indicate that, in terms of absolute number of publications, the gender gap does not seem to be closing in any country. The trends in absolute gap between male and female authors is either parallel (e.g., Canada, Australia, England, USA) or widening (e.g., majority of countries, particularly Middle Eastern countries). In terms of the ratio of female to male productivity, however, the gap is narrowing almost invariably, though at markedly different rates across countries. While some countries are nearing a ratio of .7 and are well on track for a 0.9 female to male productivity ratio, our estimates show that certain countries (particularly across the Middle East) will not reach such targets within the next 100 years. Without interventional policies, a significant gap will continue to exist in such countries. The decrease or increase in research productivity during the first year of the pandemic, in contrast to trends established before 2020, was generally parallel for male and female authors. There has been no substantial gender difference in the disruption due to the pandemic. However, opposite trends were found in a few cases. It was observed that, in some countries (e.g., The Netherlands, The United States and Germany), male productivity has been more negatively affected by the pandemic. Overall, female research productivity seems to have been more resilient to the disruptive effect of Covid-19 pandemic, although the momentum of female researchers has been negatively affected in a comparable manner to that of males.

ActinoBase: tools and protocols for researchers working on Streptomyces and other filamentous actinobacteria

Actinobacteria is an ancient phylum of Gram-positive bacteria with a characteristic high GC content to their DNA. The ActinoBase Wiki is focused on the filamentous actinobacteria, such as Streptomyces species, and the techniques and growth conditions used to study them. These organisms are studied because of their complex developmental life cycles and diverse specialised metabolism which produces many of the antibiotics currently used in the clinic. ActinoBase is a community effort that provides valuable and freely accessible resources, including protocols and practical information about filamentous actinobacteria. It is aimed at enabling knowledge exchange between members of the international research community working with these fascinating bacteria. ActinoBase is an anchor platform that underpins worldwide efforts to understand the ecology, biology and metabolic potential of these organisms. There are two key differences that set ActinoBase apart from other Wiki-based platforms: [1] ActinoBase is specifically aimed at researchers working on filamentous actinobacteria and is tailored to help users overcome challenges working with these bacteria and [2] it provides a freely accessible resource with global networking opportunities for researchers with a broad range of experience in this field.

Children, care time, career priority – What matters for junior scientists’ productivity and career perspective during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Background: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic brought about restrictions, additional workload, insecurity, or need for inventing new routines for professionals worldwide. The pandemic and its restrictions have been discussed as a career shock. OBJECTIVE: Adding knowledge to this, our study investigated the academic and family (care) situation of young scientists in a German technical university. METHODS: We conducted an online survey including young scientists from a technical university in Germany in April 2021. 346 participants (mean age 33 years, 37% women) gave self-ratings on academic and life situation during the pandemic year, care work, preferences for scientific career and family life. RESULTS: Family and career were independent priorities (r = 0.021, p = 0.676). Two thirds (68%) of the young scientists reported no deterioration in scientific outcome during the pandefmic year. But, care times and number of children impacted negatively on scientific productivity in terms of publications. This was true for both women and men. CONCLUSIONS: Young scientists need individual support for their career perspective, according to their concrete career level and life situation.

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.

Characteristics of early-career nurse researchers negatively impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify typical patterns and determinants of early-career nurse researchers (ECNRs: age ≤45 years) who reported that their research activities were negatively impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, using a data mining methodology. To gain a deeper understanding of the characteristics of these ECNRs, we compared them with the characteristics of senior nurse researchers (SNRs: age ≥46 years).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

PARTICIPANTS

1532 nurse researchers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted an anonymous online questionnaire survey that assessed individual and professional attributes of nurse researchers and their experiences from April to June 2020. We analysed the association between the impact on research activities and the individual and professional attributes using cross-tabulation, and employed the chi-square automatic interaction detection technique to perform population segmentation.

RESULTS

We found that difficulties in research management, an increased burden of student education and organisational management, and organisational management position were relatively important factors for determining the negative impact of COVID-19 on the research activities of ECNRs (p<0.05). For both ECNRs and SNRs, the most relevant determinant of disrupted research activities was 'difficulties in research management' (χ²=34.7 and 126.5, respectively, p<0.001 for both). However, only ECNRs yielded 'position in organisational management' and was extracted only for ECNRs (χ²=7.0, p=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Difficulties in research management and an increased burden of student education and organisational management had an unfavourable impact on the research activities of ECNRs. To ensure quality of nursing care and nursing science development during and after the COVID-19 era, it is important to support ECNRs in their nursing research activities and career development. Our findings could contribute to the prioritisation of interventions and policymaking for ECNRs who are particularly at risk of being negatively affected by the pandemic.

Instructor Perceptions of Student Incivility in the Online Undergraduate Science Classroom

Student incivility, defined as a student behavior perceived to be disrespectful or disruptive to the overall learning environment in a course, can negatively affect the science learning environment and instructors. The transition to online science courses during the COVID-19 pandemic created a unique environment for student incivility to take place in undergraduate courses. There are few studies that examine student incivility in online synchronous courses, and we know of no studies that have investigated student incivility during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we surveyed 283 instructors across U.S. institutions who taught undergraduate science courses with synchronous online components. We probed their experiences with student incivility during the fall 2020 term. Over half of instructors surveyed reported experiencing student incivility, with women being more likely than men to report student incivility. Compared with white instructors, people of color were more likely to perceive an increase in student incivility in fall 2020 relative to previous in-person terms. This work indicates that student incivility is perceived in the online synchronous learning environment and that the negative impacts of perceived student incivility during COVID-19 online instruction were not distributed equally among instructors, disproportionately burdening women and people of color.

Editorial commentary on the special issue emerging psychoneuroimmunology research: Future leaders in focus

The theme of this BBI-Health special issue is to promote the research, creativity and forward-thinking of future key opinion leaders in the field of psychoneuroimmunology (PNI). We asked contributing researchers to identify new ideas and spaces for innovation to map out the future trajectory of our discipline. This special issue provides global and diverse views from early career investigators focused on science, society, and/or policy, with an emphasis on diversity in all its aspects. The common thread weaving through the articles contained in this special issue is that all authors were invited to consider the future of PNI while they were experiencing the global COVID-19 lockdowns that slowed down or even prevented them from access to their “hands-on” research. The contributors vary from Master level to assistant professors, and all have already significantly contributed to the field of PNI. Each contributor has provided a photograph and short biography alongside their written perspectives. We hope that you will enjoy learning about their visions for the future of PNI and will join us with enthusiasm as we watch our field grow through the advancement of their scientific careers.

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.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cardiovascular Science: Anticipating Problems and Potential Solutions: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had worldwide repercussions for health care and research. In spring 2020, most non-COVID-19 research was halted, hindering research across the spectrum from laboratory-based experimental science to clinical research. Through the second half of 2020 and the first half of 2021, biomedical research, including cardiovascular science, only gradually restarted, with many restrictions on onsite activities, limited clinical research participation, and the challenges associated with working from home and caregiver responsibilities. Compounding these impediments, much of the global biomedical research infrastructure was redirected toward vaccine testing and deployment. This redirection of supply chains, personnel, and equipment has additionally hampered restoration of normal research activity. Transition to virtual interactions offset some of these limitations but did not adequately replace the need for scientific exchange and collaboration. Here, we outline key steps to reinvigorate biomedical research, including a call for increased support from the National Institutes of Health. We also call on academic institutions, publishers, reviewers, and supervisors to consider the impact of COVID-19 when assessing productivity, recognizing that the pandemic did not affect all equally. We identify trainees and junior investigators, especially those with caregiving roles, as most at risk of being lost from the biomedical workforce and identify steps to reduce the loss of these key investigators. Although the global pandemic highlighted the power of biomedical science to define, treat, and protect against threats to human health, significant investment in the biomedical workforce is required to maintain and promote well-being.

COVID-19 messed up my research: Insights from physical activity and nutrition translational research

The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant challenges in conducting physical activity and nutrition translational research. This encompassed all phases of translational research, including recruitment (e.g., lack of trust in the scientific community), assessment (university regulations restricting in-person assessments), intervention (conversion of face-to-face interventions to online formats), and retention (loss of employment, phone service, or housing among study participants). The COVID-19 pandemic has had varying impacts on research productivity as well. While some groups found the pandemic led to increases in productivity (as evidenced by increases seen in both manuscript and grant submissions), junior faculty, women (particularly caregivers), African American, Asian, and Latinx faculty, and mid-career and senior scientists all faced unique career and personal challenges during this time. This included competing demands on time that interfered with research productivity and mental and physical health stressors. Therefore, in order to ensure we retain promising scientists in the field of translational physical activity and nutrition science, it will be important to consider these challenges when it comes time to review tenure files and grant applications. Reviewers of these applications should note creativity in moving research forward, continued mentoring of students or other faculty, and plans to get back on track after a pause in their ability to conduct impactful physical activity and nutrition work.

Explaining Variation in Parents' and Their Children's Stress During COVID-19 Lockdowns

The coronavirus pandemic poses a substantial threat to people across the globe. In the first half of 2020, governments limited the spread of virus by imposing diverse regulations. These regulations had a particular impact on families as parents had to manage their occupational situation and childcare in parallel. Here, we examine a variation in parents' and children's stress during the lockdowns in the first half of 2020 and detect the correlates of families' stress. Between April and June 2020, we conducted an explorative online survey among n = 422 parents of 3- to 10-year-old children residing in 17 countries. Most participants came from Germany (n = 274), Iran (n = 70), UK (n = 23), and USA (n = 23). Parents estimated their own stress, the stress of their own children, and various information on potential correlates (e.g., accommodation, family constellation, education, community size, playtime for children, contact with peers, media consumption, and physical activity). Parents also stated personal values regarding openness to change, self-transcendence, self-enhancement, and conservation. The results indicate a substantial variation in the stress levels of families and their diverse reactions to regulations. Media consumption by children commonly increased in comparison to the time before the pandemic. Parents raising both pre-school- and school-aged children were at a particular risk of experiencing stress in response to regulations. Estimated stress and reactions varied with the age of children and the personal values of parents, suggesting that such variables need to be considered when implementing and evaluating regulations and supporting young families in the current and future pandemic.

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.

A lost generation? The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on early career ASD researchers

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted autism research and services. Early career researchers (ECRs) are particularly vulnerable to the impact of the pandemic on job security and career development. The goal of this study was to capture the challenges ECRs are facing during the pandemic and the supports that are needed for career development and research. ECRs were invited to complete an online survey that focused on four major areas; the impact of COVID-19 on their research; changes in productivity due to COVID-19; changes to training due to COVID-19; and current mental health. 150 ECRs were eligible and provided sufficient data for inclusion. All but one ECRs reported their research had been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Reductions in productivity were reported by 85% of ECRs. The biggest impacts included recruitment of participants, increased needs at home and personal mental health. ECRs reported a 3-fold increase in burnout, as well as increased anxiety. ECR supports, such as funding, flexibility, and tenure extensions, are required to ensure ASD research does not suffer from a "lost generation" of researchers. LAY SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has had negative impacts on research around the world. Loss of productivity impedes autism research discoveries. However, researchers in the earliest phases of their career, specifically postdoctoral fellows through individuals in assistant professor (or equivalent) positions, are particularly vulnerable to long-lasting effects of pandemic-related disruptions which may limit their ability to continue as autism researchers. This survey highlights the needs of this group and identifies mechanisms by which these early career researchers may be supported in this time. This is critical to ensure the next generation of ASD researchers and clinician scientists continue on the path to advancing understanding of autism in the decades to come.

Impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on scientific research and implications for clinical academic training - A review

A pneumonia outbreak of unknown aetiology emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019. The causative organism was identified on 7th January 2020 as a novel coronavirus (nCoV or 2019-nCoV), later renamed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The resulting coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has infected over 88 million individuals, resulted in over 1.9 million deaths, and has led to an unprecedented impact on research activities worldwide. Extraordinary challenges have also been imposed on medical and surgical trainees following redeployment to full-time clinical duties. Moreover, the introduction of travel restrictions and strict lockdown measures have forced the closure of many institutions and laboratories working on research unrelated to the pandemic. The lockdown has similarly stifled supply chains and slowed research and development endeavours, whilst research charities have endured significant financial strains that have since reshaped the allocation and availability of funds. However, worldwide scientific adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic has been observed through unprecedented levels of international collaboration alongside the uprise of remote telecommunication platforms. Although the long-term consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic on research and academic training is difficult to ascertain, the current crises will inevitably shape working and teaching patterns for years to come. To this end, we provide a comprehensive and critical evaluation of the impact of COVID-19 on scientific research and funding, as well as academic medical and surgical training.

Perspectives from the Society for Pediatric Research: advice on sustaining science and mentoring during COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic will leave an indelible mark on the careers of current medical trainees. Given the disruptions to medical education, economic impact on institutions, and the uncertainties around future job prospects, trainees are facing unprecedented challenges. This situation is especially concerning for futures of pediatric physician-scientist trainees, where concerns regarding maintaining the pipeline were well documented prior to the emergence of COVID-19. In this Perspectives article, we leverage the unique expertise of our workgroup to address concerns of physician-scientist trainees and to provide suggestions on how to navigate career trajectories in the post-COVID-19 era. We identified and addressed four major areas of concern: lack of in-person conferences and the associated decrease access to mentors and networking activities, decreased academic productivity, diminished job prospects, and mental health challenges. We also suggest actions for trainees, mentors and educational leaders, and institutions to help support trainees during the pandemic, with a goal of maintaining the pediatric physician-scientist pipeline.