The Role of Mock Reviewing Sessions in the National Research Mentoring Network Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators: A Randomized Controlled Study.

The National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (SETH) study evaluates the value of adding Developmental Network to Coaching in the career advancement of diverse Early-Stage Investigators (ESIs). Focused NIH-formatted Mock Reviewing Sessions (MRS) prior to the submission of grants can significantly enhance the scientific merits of an ESI's grant application. We evaluated the most prevalent design, analysis-related factors, and the likelihood of grant submissions and awards associated with going through MRS, using descriptive statistics, Chi-square, and logistic regression methods. A total of 62 out of 234 applications went through the MRS. There were 69.4% that pursued R grants, 22.6% career development (K) awards, and 8.0% other grant mechanisms. Comparing applications that underwent MRS versus those that did not (N = 172), 67.7% vs. 38.4% were submitted for funding (i.e., unadjusted difference of 29.3%; OR = 4.8, 95% CI = (2.4, 9.8), p-value < 0.0001). This indicates that, relative to those who did not undergo MRS, ESIs who did, were 4.8 times as likely to submit an application for funding. Also, ESIs in earlier cohorts (1-2) (a period that coincided with the pre COVID-19 era) as compared to those who were recruited at later cohorts (3-4) (i.e., during the peak of COVID-19 period) were 3.8 times as likely to submit grants (p-value < 0.0001). The most prevalent issues that were identified included insufficient statistical design considerations and plans (75%), conceptual framework (28.3%), specific aims (11.7%), evidence of significance (3.3%), and innovation (3.3%). MRS potentially enhances grant submissions for extramural funding and offers constructive feedback allowing for modifications that enhance the scientific merits of research grants.

Individual and Institutional Factors Contribute to Research Capacity Building for Early-Stage Investigators from Groups Underrepresented in Biomedical Research: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhancement of diversity within the U.S. research workforce is a recognized need and priority at a national level. Existing comprehensive programs, such as the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI), have the dual focus of building institutional research capacity and promoting investigator self-efficacy through mentoring and training. METHODS: A qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the combination of factors that explain the success and failure to submit a grant proposal by investigators underrepresented in biomedical research from the RCMI and non-RCMI institutions. The records of 211 participants enrolled in the NRMN Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) program were reviewed, and data for 79 early-stage, underrepresented faculty investigators from RCMI (n = 23) and non-RCMI (n = 56) institutions were included. RESULTS: Institutional membership (RCMI vs. non-RCMI) was used as a possible predictive factor and emerged as a contributing factor for all of the analyses. Access to local mentors was predictive of a successful grant submission for RCMI investigators, while underrepresented investigators at non-RCMI institutions who succeeded with submitting grants still lacked access to local mentors. CONCLUSION: Institutional contexts contribute to the grant writing experiences of investigators underrepresented in biomedical research.

Investigating information processing of the bimanual asymmetric cost with the response priming technique.

Constraining the degrees of freedom simplifies the coordinative challenge of bimanual asymmetric movements. This, however, comes at the cost of increased processing demands during movement preparation, referred to as the bimanual asymmetric cost. The goal of the present study was to further investigate information processing of the bimanual asymmetric cost with the response priming technique. This technique involved precuing a movement to encourage it to be preprogrammed. A different movement is occasionally cued by the go signal, which required the preprogrammed movement to be reprogrammed. In Experiment 1, 2 preprogrammed unimanual movements were reprogrammed, or integrated, into a bimanual movement. In Experiment 2, a preprogrammed bimanual movement was reprogrammed, or de-integrated, into a unimanual movement. Both experiments revealed 2 costs when integrating or de-integrating bimanual movements. One cost was likely related to aborting 1 movement and preparing another, which is the typical reprogramming cost found in response priming experiments. The second cost was likely related to constraining the degrees of freedom of bimanual asymmetric movements, which is a bimanual asymmetric cost. Integrating 2 unimanual movements into a bimanual asymmetric movement involves constraining the degrees of freedom, and de-integrating a bimanual asymmetric movement into a unimanual movement involves unconstraining the degrees of freedom. Both reprogramming and bimanual asymmetric costs occurred in 1 of the experimental conditions, and the interesting finding was that their effects were additive. Additive costs suggest that each cost affects a different stage of movement preparation. We suggest that the bimanual asymmetric cost occurs during response selection. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).