4.1 Article

CONVERSATION CAFES AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FORMATION FOR RESEARCH TRAINING AND MENTORING OF UNDERREPRESENTED FACULTY AT HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: OBESITY HEALTH DISPARITIES (OHD) PRIDE PROGRAM

期刊

ETHNICITY & DISEASE
卷 30, 期 1, 页码 83-90

出版社

ETHNICITY & DISEASE, INC
DOI: 10.18865/ed.30.1.83

关键词

Research Training and Mentoring; Health Disparities; Obesity Research; Population Health

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R25HL126145]
  2. National Institute on Aging [K02AG059140]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of research training opportunities for investigators from the untapped pool of traditionally underrepresented racial/ethnic groups has gained intense interest at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The significant and persistent disparity in the likelihood of R01 funding between African American and Whites was highlighted in the groundbreaking 2011 report, Race, Ethnicity, and NIH Research Awards. Disparities in binding success were also shown to exist at the institutional level, as 30 institutions receive a disproportionate share of federal research funding.Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have a dual commitment to education and research; however, the teaching loads at HBCUs may present challenges for research-oriented faculty. Few research training and mentoring programs have been specifically designed for this group. During 2015 and 2016, we held three conversation cafes with 77 participants in Jackson, Mississippi and Baltimore, Maryland. The purpose of this article is to describe findings from these conversation cafes regarding barriers and facilitators to building robust research careers at HBCUs, and to illustrate how these data were used to adapt the conceptual framework for the NHLBI-funded Obesity Health Disparities (OHD) PRIDE program. Identified barriers included teaching and advising loads, infrastructures, and lack of research mentors on campus. The benefit of incorporating research into classroom teaching was a noted facilitator.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据