Community-based participatory research (CBPR) and patient/ community engaged research (P/CEnR) are shown to be effective approaches that improve health inequities, particularly among disadvantaged populations. While the science of CBPR demonstrates promising partnering practices that lead to effective interventions, there are institutional and structural barriers to creating and sustaining patient/community research within academic health centers (AHCs). As the field matures, there is a growing need to enhance patient/community leadership so that communities can set their own research agendas and priorities.

Engage for Equity PLUS sought to address these challenges by implementing an engagement intervention aimed at transforming AHCs through supporting champion teams of academic, community, and patient partners to strengthen research infrastructures for P/CEnR. This paper uses a qualitative, case study analysis to describe how E2PLUS enabled champion teams at Stanford School of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson/University of Washington Cancer Consortium, and Morehouse School of Medicine to pursue institutional change strategies through coaching, workshops, contextual data analysis, and a community of practice.

This paper describes key themes of how E2Plus helped identify targets of change by a) using institutional data collection as core to generating critical consciousness of contextual conditions; b) implementing feasible E2PLUS strategies to leverage conditions for catalyzing a champion team for advocacy and achievable actions; c) identifying the critical role of patients/community members in stimulating change; and d) the role of continual collective reflection.

We discuss the overall implications for E2 PLUS for other AHCs working toward sustainable community/patient engaged research policies and practices.

Researchers acknowledge the need to share study results with the patients and their communities, but this is not done consistently due to a plethora of barriers, including a paucity of data to guide best practice approaches in different populations.

This study was nested within a large multi-center randomized controlled trial of antimalaria treatment. Data on dissemination preferences were collected at the third-month follow-up visit using a short questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and subsequently fed into an iterative process with key stakeholders, to develop suitable strategies for result dissemination.

A total of 960 patients were enrolled in the trial, of whom 84.0% participated in the nested survey. A total of 601 (74.6%) participants indicated interest in receiving trial results. There was significant heterogeneity by study country, with 33.3% (58/174) of patients indicating being interested in Cambodia, 100% (334/334) in Ethiopia, 97.7% (209/214) in Pakistan, but none (0/85) in Indonesia. The preferred method of dissemination varied by site, with community meetings, favored in Ethiopia (79.0%, 264/334) and individualized communication such as a letter (27.6%, 16/58) or phone calls (37.9%, 22/58) in Cambodia. Dissemination strategies were designed with key stakeholders and based on patient preferences but required adaptation to accommodate local logistical challenges.

The varying preferences observed across different sites underscore that a one-size-fits-all approach is inadequate. Strategies can be tailored to patient preference but require adaptation to accommodate logistical challenges.

Oral mucositis (OM) is a significant complication of cytotoxic cancer therapy and has no effective therapies. Unfortunately, the termination rate of clinical trials (CTs) testing potential OM interventions remains high. Here, we compared the characteristics of failed trials and matched completed trials to identify common features, which might inform better study design.

CTs for the prevention/treatment of OM were identified using ClinicalTrials.gov. Failed (terminated or withdrawn) trials were evaluated for phase, type of cancer treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or chemo-radiotherapy), subject accrual, study type, number of clinical sites, intervention type, inclusion criteria, sponsor type, and reason(s) for failure. A secondary analysis of completed OM CTs that were individually matched to failed trials based on indication and phase or intervention type served as a control.

Failed OM CTs were more likely to have academic sponsorship (45.7% vs. 39.1%), nonrandomized design (19.6% vs. 4.3%), and lower mean subject accrual (27.8 subjects vs. 101.4 subjects) compared to completed trials. The leading reason for termination was recruitment/enrollment (37.9%). Recruitment/enrollment and safety/efficacy accounted for failure in 84.6% of phase II trials.

Contrary to general CTs where safety/efficacy concerns predominate, our results suggest OM-related trial failures are associated with a broader list of challenges including recruitment/enrollment, funding/sponsorship, and investigator/site issues. OM CTs demand aggressive planning, funding, and careful selection of trial sites and sponsorship to assure timely subject recruitment and reduce the risk for early termination and withdrawal.

We sought to describe perspectives among Black nursing professionals and community leaders regarding the return of genetic test results, and place perspectives into context with aggregated findings in the All of Us Research Program’s Data Browser.

Semi-structured, virtual interviews were held with adults (≥18 years of age) self-identifying as Black. A 2-step thematic analysis process was used to assess interviewee perspectives with (sub)themes identified in the literature across two topics: drug/medication response and hereditary disease risk. Themes were placed into context with Data Browser content, focusing on genes and their respective alleles with frequencies ≥0.10 in African ancestry populations in All of Us.

Interviewee perspectives aligned with previously identified major themes in the literature (motivations to engage or disengage; integrating research and care), with five (5) subthemes emerging across major themes. Seven (7) alleles were observed with frequencies ≥0.10 for three (3) pharmacogenomic (PGx) biomarkers in the Data Browser for African ancestry populations: CYP2C19 (SNV, 10-94761900-C-T; SNV,10-94775367-A-G; SNV 10-94781859-G-A), DPYD (SNV, 1-97883329-A-G; SNV, 1-97515839-T-C), UGT1A1 (insertion, 2-233760233-C-CAT; SNV, 2-233757136-G-A). Four (4) alleles were observed with frequencies ≥0.10 for three (3) genes implicated in hereditary disease risk, two of which contemporaneously hold PGx implications for African ancestry populations: CACNA1S (PGx, SNV, 1-201112815-C-T; SNV, 1-201110107-C-T), SCN5A (no PGx, SNV, 3-38603929-T-C), TP53 (PGx, SNV, 17-7676154-G-C).

Our findings convey important clinical and translational science considerations for individuals and community leaders of African ancestry and researchers seeking reputable, publicly available information to understand, communicate, and act on genomic findings.

The purpose of this research was to understand perceptions and experiences of inclusion among underrepresented early-career biomedical researchers (postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty) enrolled in the Building Up study. Because inclusion is vital to job satisfaction and engagement, our goal was to shed light on aspects of and barriers to inclusion within the academic workforce.

We used qualitative interviews to assess workplace experiences of 25 underrepresented postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty including: their daily work experiences; sense of the workplace culture within the institutions; experiences with microaggressions, racism, and discrimination; and whether the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies and practices at their institution enhanced their experiences. Using qualitative methods, we identified themes that highlighted high-level characteristics of inclusion.

Four distinct themes were identified: (1) participants appreciated the flexibility, versatility, and sense of fulfillment of their positions which enhanced feelings of inclusion; (2) greater psychological safety led to a greater sense of belonging to a research community; (3) participants had varied experiences of inclusion in the presence of microaggressions, racism, and discrimination; and (4) access to opportunities and resources increased feelings of value within the workplace.

Our findings provide new insight into how inclusion is experienced within the institution among underrepresented early-career biomedical researchers. This research points to specific approaches that could be used to enhance experiences of inclusion and to address barriers. More research is needed to understand how to accomplish a balance between the two, so that perceptions of inclusion outweigh negative experiences.

To date, the NIH Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative has funded over 1,000 projects that aim to identify new therapeutic targets for pain and substance use disorder (SUD), develop nonpharmacological strategies for pain management, and improve overdose and addiction treatment across settings. This study conducted a portfolio analysis of HEAL’s research to assess opportunities to advance translation and implementation.

HEAL projects (FY 2018–2022) were classified into early (T0–T1) and later (T2–T4) translational stages. Eleven coders used a 54-item data collection tool based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to extract project characteristics (e.g., population, research setting) relevant to translation and implementation. Descriptive statistics and visualization techniques were employed to analyze and map aggregate characteristics onto CFIR’s domains (e.g., outer setting).

HEAL’s portfolio comprised 923 projects (33.7% T0–T1; 67.3% T2–T4), ranging from basic science (27.1%) and preclinical research (21.4%) to clinical (36.8%), implementation (27.1%), and dissemination research (13.1%). Most projects primarily addressed either addiction (46.3%) or pain (37.4%). Implementation-related gaps included the underrepresentation of certain populations (e.g., sexual/gender minorities: 0.5%). T0–T1 projects occurred primarily in laboratory settings (35.1%), while T2–T4 projects were concentrated in healthcare settings (e.g., hospitals: 21.6%) with limited transferability to other contexts (e.g., community: 12.9%).

Opportunities to advance translational and implementation efforts include fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, prioritizing underserved populations, engaging with community leaders and policy stakeholders, and targeting evidence-based practices in nonclinical settings. Ongoing analyses can guide strategic investments to maximize HEAL’s impact on substance use and pain crises.

Work in science, medicine, and engineering increasingly relies on collaborations among diverse experts to solve complex problems. Despite the importance of interprofessional training and practice to enhance collaboration and knowledge integration, there is a lack of a conceptually meaningful, valid, and reliable measure of individual capacity for interdisciplinary knowledge integration. This study contributes a conceptual framework and empirical tool to facilitate both research and practice of interdisciplinary collaborations.

We conduct a three-phase, five-study investigation to develop and validate a measure of individual perspective integration capability (PIC), which assesses individual willingness and ability to integrate knowledge with others during collaborative work. Phase 1 includes item generation and reduction in three studies using different samples of respondents. Phase 2 demonstrates convergent and discriminant validity with conceptually related and unrelated constructs, using a separate sample of respondents. Phase 3 tests criterion-related validity and mediation by examining the multilevel relationships between PIC and key antecedents and outcomes, using data from a unique sample of research scientists in interdisciplinary medical research teams.

Across the three phases of our study, the results demonstrate support for the PIC instrument’s factor structure, reliability, and validity. We also demonstrated that the PIC construct has important implications for individuals engaged in interdisciplinary collaborations.

Having a conceptually meaningful, valid, reliable, and easily administered survey instrument will facilitate further study of interdisciplinary collaboration, and the development and evaluation of integration efforts of teams engaged in convergent and translational initiatives.

Mentored undergraduate research experiences (UREs) can play a critical role in developing science identity and skills, especially for students from historically underrepresented backgrounds. This study investigates science identity and responsibility for scientific roles among scholars in a program aiming to diversify the biomedical workforce. Scholars were placed in UREs at either their home institution (a minority-serving institution [MSI]) or at a research-intensive medical institution with a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA).

We analyze data from surveys administered annually to the scholars. We first compare changes in science identity for scholars placed at the MSI and the CTSA site from the term after the scholar started their URE to one year later. We then analyze differences in responsibility in scientific roles performed by scholars at the two institutions.

We found evidence of gains in science identity after a year for scholars placed at both institutions but of a somewhat larger magnitude at the CTSA site. However, no significant differences were observed across institutions on science identity at the endpoint. An exploration of scientific roles suggests that scholars at the CTSA site assumed more responsibility in roles related to data curation and analysis, while scholars at the MSI had higher responsibility for resource acquisition-related roles.

These results suggest that CTSA site URE placements may offer distinct opportunities for both identity formation and skill development beyond placements at home institutions. Overall, these results suggest opportunities for partnerships between MSIs and CTSA sites in the training of biomedical researchers.

The interpersonal and relational dimensions of mentoring have been identified as critical components of effective mentorship. However, no scale currently exists to assess this specific aspect of the relationship. This study introduces a new instrument, the mentorship working alliance (MWA) – mentee version, and presents initial evidence supporting its validity in evaluating the interpersonal elements of mentoring relationships.

Through a series of pilot tests and revisions, we developed a 12-item scale that assesses two dimensions of the MWA: relational quality (6 items), which captures how a mentee feels about the relationship, and relational effectiveness (6 items), which reflects the mentee’s perception of their mentor’s actions in facilitating or advancing the working relationship. To evaluate the scale’s construct validity and reliability, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and internal consistency reliability analysis on a sample of 345 graduate students.

CFA provided evidence for the validity of the two-dimensional MWA scale, which assesses relational quality and relational effectiveness, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.96 and 0.89, respectively. All parameter estimates for individual items were significant, with standardized factor loadings ranging from 0.66 to .83.

The MWA scale – mentee version enables researchers to assess the interpersonal dimensions of mentoring relationships, offering valuable insights into the components of effective mentorship. By introducing this scale, we pave the way for further investigation into how mentorship interventions influence the MWA, thereby enhancing the overall quality of mentoring experiences. Additionally, we offer recommendations for future studies.