ABSTRACT
High-impact practices (HIPs) are educational practices that foster student success. HIPs have not been widely used in cancer education and research despite the need for students to develop key transferable skills and cultivate social responsibility. Our study addresses this need by implementing four community-based learning HIPs within the context of cancer education and research. Each HIP was classified as having low, moderate, or high alignment with the traits of effective HIPs. Undergraduate science students participated in one to four HIPs as a Feedback Participant, General Volunteer, Student Leader, or Cancer Undergraduate Research and Education (CURES) Class Student. We then studied the effect of these HIPs on students' development of knowledge and skills; career interest and preparedness; and social responsibility. Results from self-reported questionnaires showed that HIPs increased students' cancer knowledge and developed their transferable and technical skills. Many students reported that these HIPs strongly impacted their career preparedness; positively influenced their interest in pursuing careers in health or biomedical sciences; and encouraged them to participate in community service activities. Thus, these findings provide new insights into the perceived benefits of HIPs in cancer education and research by undergraduate students.
ABSTRACT
The Jewish population's high risk for certain genetic conditions is well established. The Orthodox Jewish community, a denomination of the larger Jewish population, has distinct customs and cultural practices and a complex relationship with Western medicine and medical genetics. Clergy play a central role as stakeholders in the Orthodox Jewish community, and their input often informs key medical decisions for their congregants. Orthodox clergy have a unique structure for advising their community members, which is based on Jewish law. A qualitative research methods study was conducted to learn more about the needs of Orthodox Jewish clergy in the greater Los Angeles area with regard to prenatal genetic testing. The present study aims to understand the function of clergy, cultural implications in genetics care, and ways to improve cooperation between clergy and medical providers. 18 clergy members were recruited to join the study, with a 100% participation rate. Thematic analysis of individual interviews highlighted four major themes: the multitude of roles of clergy; pragmatic testing; a need for mutual respect; and interactions between medical providers and clergy. The existing community infrastructure may be used as the framework to provide a greater awareness of genetic care to this community. Future research should be conducted to explore how to improve interactions between genetic counselors and Orthodox Jewish clergy and the best practices for cultural competency.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Translational research is an ideology focussed on streamlining the transition of novel research into clinical practice to ultimately benefit populations. Central to this approach is overcoming barriers to research involvement and interdisciplinary collaboration. Identifying barriers has been the subject of several studies focused on communities with large academic hospitals. The Windsor-Essex region is currently built around community hospitals which have less of an emphasis on research, employ fewer physicians holding academic appointments and generally do not provide incentivised time for research and training. In this study, we surveyed clinicians and researchers working in Windsor-Essex to gain insight into barriers to translational research important to those working in smaller sized, community-based research networks. METHODS: Using an anonymous close-ended Qualtrics survey distributed via email, we surveyed faculty members from The University of Windsor and clinical care providers from Windsor-Essex (n = 68). This included 24 physicians, 14 allied health professionals, and 30 non-clinician researchers. RESULTS: Managing competing interests, lack of time, funding, infrastructure, and networks were identified by greater than 75% of participants as barriers to research involvement. 62% of physicians identified the lack of permanent post-graduate medical trainees as a barrier. Clinicians were consistently less experienced in research skills compared to others; particularly in publishing results and applying for funding (p < 0.001). Schedule incompatibility, funding issues and identifying interested collaborators with overlapping interests were identified as barriers to interdisciplinary collaboration by 80% of participants. Moreover, 46% of those surveyed were unhappy with their research involvement and these individuals were 13% more likely to perceive research as important for their career progression (p = 0.244). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies several important barriers to translational research in Windsor-Essex and suggests that many motivated researchers are unhappy with their current involvement. These results will inform decision making in the research community of Windsor-Essex and provides insight for communities of similar size and research capacity. Ultimately, enabling the translation of clinical research in all communities is required to ensure equitable access to cutting edge care.
