Login / Signup

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

Mohamed MubasherThomas PearsonMuhammed Yassin IdrisKimberly LawsonJada HolmesPriscilla PemuAdriana BaezJonathan K StilesMaritza S SalazarWinston E ThompsonAlexander QuarshieLee S CaplanYulia A Levites StrekalovaElizabeth O Ofili
Published in: International journal of environmental research and public health (2023)
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.
Keyphrases
  • coronavirus disease
  • early stage
  • sars cov
  • healthcare
  • public health
  • quality improvement
  • ms ms
  • health information
  • squamous cell carcinoma
  • medical students
  • risk assessment
  • global health
  • human health
  • network analysis