3.8 Article

From insights to action: Enriching the clinical and translational research workforce by developing diverse and inclusive career programs

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/cts.2022.434

关键词

Diversity; training; mentoring; translational science; workforce; clinical research

资金

  1. University of Rochester CLIC [U24TR002260]
  2. NCATS at the NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article describes a methodology for the development of a diverse clinical and translational science workforce. The study evaluates the importance of recruiting and retaining underrepresented persons and women in order to advance the field of translational science.
Diversification of the Translational Science workforce is a strategic goal for the National Center for the Advancement of Translational Science (NCATS) program. NCATS has identified the development of translational science education, training, and support for a diverse translational science workforce as key to advancing the growing field of translational science. An annual mixed-methods assessment has been conducted on Common Metrics data submitted by over 60 Clinical & Translational Science Awards (CTSA) programs nationwide and includes metrics addressing recruitment and retention of scientists with particular attention to underrepresented persons and women. This article describes a methodology for the development of From Insights to Action, a resource for guiding program implementation and strategic planning to develop a diverse clinical and translational science workforce. This was informed by the Common Metrics Initiative process and constituted of findings from qualitative interviews of a subset of CTSAs that participated. The dissemination of this guide had several impacts, including providing structural foci for the CTSA Fall 2020 program meeting centered on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in translational science; addressing NCATS' goal of workforce diversity; and understanding the number of diverse graduates still engaged in research.

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

3.8
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