Background: Identification of evidence-based factors related to status of the clinical research professional (CRP) workforce at academic medical centers (AMCs) will provide context for National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) policy considerations and guidance. The objective of this study is to explore barriers and opportunities related to the recruitment and retention of the CRP workforce. Materials and Methods: Qualitative data from a series of Un-Meeting breakout sessions and open-text survey questions were analyzed to explore barriers and recommendations for improving AMC CRP recruitment, retention and diversity. Results: While certain institutions have established competency-based frameworks for job descriptions, standardization remains generally lacking across CTSAs. AMCs report substantial increases in unfilled CRP positions leading to operational instability. Data confirmed an urgent need for closing gaps in CRP workforce at AMCs, especially for attracting, training, retaining, and diversifying qualified personnel. Improved collaboration with human resource departments, engagement with principal investigators, and overcoming both organizational and resource challenges were suggested strategies, as well as development of outreach to universities, community colleges, and high schools raising awareness of CRP career pathways. Discussion: Based on input from 130 CRP leaders at 35 CTSAs, four National Institute of General Medical Sciences’ Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program sites, along with industry and government representatives, we identified several barriers to successful recruitment and retention of a highly trained and diverse CRP workforce. Results, including securing institutional support, champions, standardizing and adopting proven national models, improving local institutional policies to facilitate CRP hiring and job progression point to potential solutions.

Background: Defining key barriers to the development of a well-trained clinical research professional (CRP) workforce is an essential first step in identifying solutions for successful CRP onboarding, training, and competency development, which will enhance quality across the clinical and translational research enterprise. This study aimed to summarize barriers and best practices at academic medical centers related to effective CRP onboarding, training, professional development, identify challenges with the assessment of and mentoring for CRP competency growth, and describe opportunities to improve training and professionalization for the CRP career pathway. Materials/Methods: Qualitative data from a series of Un-Meeting breakout sessions and open-text survey questions were analyzed to explore the complex issues involved when developing high-quality onboarding and continuing education opportunities for CRPs at academic medical centers. Results: Results suggest there are several barriers to training the CRP workforce, including balancing foundational onboarding with role-based training, managing logistical challenges and institutional contexts, identifying/enlisting institutional champions, assessing competency, and providing high-quality mentorship. Several of these themes are interrelated. Two universal threads present throughout all themes are the need for effective communication and the need to improve professionalization of the CRP career pathway. Conclusion: Few institutions have solved all the issues related to training a competent and adaptable CRP workforce, although some have addressed one or more. We applied a socio-technical lens to illustrate our findings and the need for NCATS-funded academic medical centers to work collaboratively within and across institutions to overcome training barriers and support a vital, well-qualified workforce and present several exemplars from the field to help attain this goal.

Clinical research training programs exist across the country, but no quantitative studies have been performed to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. The goal of this study was to evaluate the success of the clinical research training program at the University of Cincinnati by comparing the publication histories of pediatric fellows who graduated from the clinical and translational research master of science (MS) degree programs between 1995 and 2011 with fellows who did not pursue an MS degree. Among 296 pediatric fellows, 44 of 54 graduates (81%) published at least 1 first-authored paper, as compared with 149 of 242 (62%) fellows who did not obtain an MS degree (p<0.01). In multivariable analysis, 3-4 years after program completion, MS graduates published more papers overall (R2=0.10) and more first-authored papers than did non-MS graduates (R2=0.04). These findings suggest that graduate training in clinical and translational research is related to an increase in research productivity as assessed by publication rates.

The number of clinical research training programs has increased over the last 5–10 years, but few studies have quantitatively evaluated the effectiveness of these programs. The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical and translational research training program at the University of Cincinnati by comparing the number of National Institutes of Health grants awarded to pediatric fellows who graduated from the MS degree program between 1995 and 2013 vs. fellows who did not pursue an MS degree. Among 394 pediatric fellows, 16 of 81 (20%) MS alumni were awarded at least 1 NIH grant, as compared with 28 of 313 (9%) fellows who did not obtain an MS degree (p < 0.02). In multivariable analysis, MS alumni were more than 3 times as likely to have received at least 1 grant than were non-MS fellows (OR=3.5, 95% CI [1.7–7.2]; C-statistic=0.71) and MS alumni were more likely to obtain at least 1 K-series (OR=4.1, 95% CI [1.6–10.2]; C-statistic=0.74), M-series (OR=11.8, 95% CI [3.4–41.4]; C-statistic=0.81), or R-series (OR=10.1, 95% CI [2.4–42.8]; C-statistic=0.74) grant than were non-MS fellows. These findings suggest that graduate training in clinical and translational research prepares graduates for the highly competitive field of clinical and translational research.

Background and Objectives: The medical community has been concerned about the shortage of family physicians for decades. Identification of likely family medicine (FM) student matches early in medical school is an efficient recruitment tool. The objective of this study was to analyze qualitative data from medical school applications to establish themes that differentiate future family physicians from their non-FM counterparts. Methods: We conducted a qualitative analysis of admissions essays from two groups of 2010-2019 medical school graduates: a study group of students who matched to FM (n=135) and a random sample comparison group of non-FM matches (n=136). We utilized a natural language modeling platform to recognize semantic patterns in the data. This platform generated keywords for each sample, which then guided a more traditional content analysis of the qualitative data for themes. Results: The two groups shared two themes: emotions and science/academics, but with some differences in thematic emphasis. The study group tended toward more positive emotions and the comparison group tended to utilize more specialized scientific language. The study group exhibited two unique themes: special interests in service and community/people. A secondary theme of religious faith was evident in the FM study group. The comparison group exhibited two unique themes: lab/clinical research and career aspirations. Conclusions: Aided by machine learning, a novel analytical approach revealed key differences between FM and non-FM student application materials. Findings suggest qualitative application data may contain identifiable thematic differences when comparing students who eventually match into FM residency programs to those who match into other specialties. Assessing student potential for FM could help guide recruitment and mentorship activities.