LMIC Research Centers' Experiences Hosting U.S. and LMIC Trainees: Evaluation of the Fogarty Global Health Fellows and Scholars Program, 2012 to 2020.

In this mixed-methods study, we explore themes that emerged from a survey assessing the programmatic experiences of mentors and administrators at institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) hosting trainees supported by the Fogarty International Center's Global Health Program for Fellows and Scholars. A total of 89 of 170 potential respondents representing 31 countries completed the survey (response rate, 52.4%). There was agreement among respondents that their institutions received sufficient funds to support trainees and had the capacity to manage operational and financial aspects of the program. A majority also agreed that both LMIC and U.S. trainees were beneficial to the host institutions, and that trainee projects were relevant to the needs of the host country. Respondents felt that program benefits to LMIC trainees could be improved by increasing the research consumables budget, increasing the flexibility of program timelines, and increasing engagement between LMIC and U.S. trainees and institutions. Respondents indicated that both U.S. and LMIC trainees behaved professionally (including demonstrating respectful and ethical behavior) and took appropriate initiative to conduct their research projects. Findings from this study will help inform innovations to similar training initiatives that will enhance sustainability and improve program performance, and will be responsive to local needs.

Building Physician-Scientist Skills in R Programming:A Short Workshop Report.

Introduction: Statistical analysis programs require coding experience and a basic understanding of programming, skills which are not taught as part of medical school or residency curricula. Methods: We conducted a five-day course for early-career Nigerian physician-scientists interested in learning common statistical tests and acquiring R programming skills. The workshop included didactic presentations, small group learning activities, and interactive discussions. A baseline questionnaire captured participant demographics and solicited participants' level of confidence in understanding/performing common statistical tests. REDCap questionnaires were emailed to obtain feedback on educational format and content. A post-workshop assessment covered participants' overall impression of the program. Results: A total of 23 participants attended the program. Most participants were male (n=14, 60.9%) and at an early stage in their career (assistant professor, n=20, 87.0%). Approximately 70% of respondents indicated having received some prior training in statistics. The proportion of participants without experience using R and SAS software (90% and 85%, respectively) was greater than the corresponding proportions for Stata (55%) and SPSS (20%). Prior to the workshop, most respondents expressed being "not at all confident" in performing one-way ANOVA (60%), logistic regression (68%), simple linear regression (60%), and McNemar's test (80%). There was a statistically significant post-workshop improvement in the level of confidence in understanding and performing common statistical tests. The course was rated on a 0-100 scale as "moderately difficult" (mean ± SD: 51.7 ± 19.5). Most participants felt comfortable in putting the knowledge learned into practice (82.2 ± 17.1). Conclusion and Public Health Implications: Introductory R can be taught to junior physician-scientists in resource-limited settings and can inform the development and implementation of similar training initiatives in analogous settings.