Research Experience and Mentorship as Critical Interventions to Advance Diversity in Biomedical Science

生物医学劳动力的多样化对于满足美国的医疗保健需求至关重要。 人口从一个理科专业的本科生到一个理科专业的本科生， 研究人员，往往是来自代表性不足的群体的学生。一些学生坚持，但 大多数人离开了科学研究的职业道路，要么从来没有进入研究生院，要么没有 成为一名独立的科学家我们将建立在我们既定的纵向 测试两种广泛使用的干预措施的长期有效性的研究：本科生研究 经验（URE）和教师指导。在2005-2017年期间，我们的研究团队进行了一项NIH- 资助的纵向研究，以测试正式干预措施在留住学生从 在生物医学研究中代表性不足的群体（TheScienceStudy; R 01 GM 075316）。结果服务于 强调某些干预措施的有效性以及与其他干预措施相关的挑战。我们有 12年的数据对1，243黑人和西班牙裔前科学学生。他们现在正在完成他们的 培训（78%获得学士学位，32%是硕士19%的博士学位），我们有一个学期- 关于URE和教师指导持续时间，强度，质量和满意度的学期数据。倾向 分数将提供一个平衡的比较组，以测试这些方法的有效性。 后续分析侧重于剂量效应。使用平衡的身份设计 理论框架，我们将收集五年的前瞻性数据来回答关键问题。 具体来说，我们将量化URES对生物医学职业成功标志的长期影响 (e.g.,劳动力进入，进步，学术生产力），生活满意度和福祉。还有， 本科生研究经验的哪些方面（即，暴露、剂量、质量）影响了 培养下一代生物医学研究人员的有效性？最后，我们将评估 本科生导师网络的长期影响（例如，支持质量、网络多样性） 未来生物医学职业的成功标志，生活满意度，特别是幸福， 指导网络的各个方面（即，存在、数量、质量）产生了最显著的影响。 最后，我们将评估科学和科学身份平衡对有效性的中介作用， URES和黑人和西班牙裔早期和中期职业生物医学科学家的成功导师。 拟议的研究对培训计划和干预措施有直接影响。我们的具体 目标测试两个广泛实施的干预措施的直接影响-研究经验和 指导-以及围绕这些干预措施的早期和中期的边界条件- 在未被充分代表的理科学生中的职业坚持和成功。

Diversifying the biomedical workforce is imperative to meet the healthcare needs of the U.S. population. It is a long journey from being an undergraduate science major to becoming a scientific researcher, often more so for students from underrepresented groups. Some students persist, yet the majority leave the scientific research career path, either never making it to graduate school or failing to make the transition to becoming an independent scientist. We will build on our established longitudinal research to test the long-term effectiveness of two widely utilized interventions: undergraduate research experience (URE) and faculty mentorship. Between 2005-2017, our research team conducted an NIH- funded longitudinal study to test the effectiveness of formal interventions in retaining students from underrepresented groups in biomedical research (TheScienceStudy; R01GM075316). The results served to highlight the effectiveness of some interventions and the challenges associated with others. We have 12 years of data on 1,243 Black and Hispanic former science students. They are now completing their training (78% received a B.S., 32% an M.S., and 19% a Doctoral degree), and we have semester-by- semester data on URE and faculty mentorship duration, intensity, quality, and satisfaction. Propensity scores will provide a balanced comparison group against which to test the effectiveness of these interventions, with follow-up analyses focused on dosage effects. Using the Balanced Identity Design theoretical framework, we will collect five years of prospective data to answer critical questions. Specifically, we will quantify the long-term impact of UREs on biomedical career hallmarks of success (e.g., workforce entry, advancement, scholarly productivity), life satisfaction, and well-being. Also, what aspects of the undergraduate research experience (i.e., exposure, dosage, quality) have impacted the effectiveness of training the next generation of biomedical researchers? Finally, we will assess the long-term impact of undergraduate mentorship networks (e.g., quality of support, network diversity) on future biomedical career hallmarks of success, life satisfaction, and well-being specifically, which facets of mentorship networks (i.e., presence, quantity, quality) have had the most significant impact. Finally, we will assess the mediating role of science and science identity balance on the effectiveness of UREs and mentorship on the success of Black and Hispanic early and mid-career biomedical scientists. The proposed research has direct implications for training programs and interventions. Our specific aims test the direct impact of two widely implemented interventions – research experience and mentorship – as well as the boundary conditions surrounding these interventions on early and mid- career persistence and success among underrepresented science students.