The Pediatric Heart Network Scholar Award programme: a unique mentored award embedded within a multicentre network.
The Pediatric Heart Network Scholar Award programme: a unique mentored award embedded within a multicentre network.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s1047951118000483
复制
发表时间：
2018-06
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
Border WL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Minich LL;Pemberton VL;Shekerdemian LS;Millar MM;Newburger JW;Glatz AC;Graham EM;Czosek RJ;Pasquali SK;Seed M;Border WL
儿科心脏病网络设计了一个职业发展奖，以培训下一代临床医生科学家从事与儿科心脏病学相关的研究，这是一个历来资金不足的领域。我们试图找出该计划的优势/劣势，并描述学者的学术成就和网络的投资回报。向申请者--13名有资助的申请者和19名无资助的申请者--以及20名导师和/或主要调查人员发送了旨在评估该方案的调查问题。计算了反应分布。χ2关联性测试评估了有资助的学者、无资助的申请者和导师/主要调查人员在申请/遴选过程中的评级差异。学者们报告了资助后的学术成就。申请者的调查回复率为88%，导师/主要调查人员的回复率为100%。98%的受访者认为检讨的清晰度和公平性为“清晰/公平”或“非常清楚/非常公平”，但获资助的学者、未获资助的申请人及导师/主要研究人员的反应有所不同(Clarityχ2=10.85，p=0.03；公平性χ2=16.97，p=0.002)。在没有资金支持的申请者中，有近一半的人认为反馈“没有用处”(47%)。“扩大他们的合作网络”和“增加出版潜力”是学者们评价最高的好处。导师/主要调查人员认为该方案对学者(100%)和网络(75%)“非常”有价值。这13位学者是97篇摘要和109篇手稿的第一作者/资深作者，在22个儿科心脏网络委员会服务，并获得随后的9,673,660美元的外部资助，每花费一美元学者就会获得10美元的回报。总体而言，患者对学者奖的满意度很高，学者们达到了许多成功的学术标志。尽管如此，还是确定了方案挑战，并制定了改进战略。
The Pediatric Heart Network designed a career development award to train the next generation of clinician scientists in paediatric-cardiology-related research, a historically underfunded area. We sought to identify the strengths/weaknesses of the programme and describe the scholars’ academic achievements and the network’s return on investment. Survey questions designed to evaluate the programme were sent to applicants – 13 funded and 19 unfunded applicants – and 20 mentors and/or principal investigators. Response distributions were calculated. χ2 tests of association assessed differences in ratings of the application/selection processes among funded scholars, unfunded applicants, and mentors/principal investigators. Scholars reported post-funding academic achievements. Survey response rates were 88% for applicants and 100% for mentor/principal investigators. Clarity and fairness of the review were rated as “clear/fair” or “very clear/very fair” by 98% of respondents, but the responses varied among funded scholars, unfunded applicants, and mentors/principal investigators (clarity χ2 = 10.85, p = 0.03; fairness χ2 = 16.97, p = 0.002). Nearly half of the unfunded applicants rated feedback as “not useful” (47%). “Expanding their collaborative network” and “increasing publication potential” were the highest-rated benefits for scholars. Mentors/principal investigators found the programme “very” valuable for the scholars (100%) and the network (75%). The 13 scholars were first/senior authors for 97 abstracts and 109 manuscripts, served on 22 Pediatric Heart Network committees, and were awarded $9,673,660 in subsequent extramural funding for a return of ~$10 for every scholar dollar spent. Overall, patient satisfaction with the Scholar Award was high and scholars met many academic markers of success. Despite this, programme challenges were identified and improvement strategies were developed.
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Petersen JW;Winchester DE;Park K;Szady AD;Della Rocca DG;Ahmed M;Tassin H;Qi Y;Pepine CJ
通讯作者：
Pepine CJ