Purpose: The article outlines select individual and institutional factors that could contribute to rehabilitation, disability, and health research productivity among minority-serving institutions (MSIs; i.e., historically Black colleges/universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and American Indian tribal colleges/universities). Method: We conducted 1 focus group with 12 faculty members from MSIs to identify their perceptions on research productivity factors. Both purposive and convenience sampling techniques were used to recruit participants. Data were audio-recorded and transcribed. An open coding approach was used to generate themes and codes, and the analysis was completed using NVivo (Version 10). Results: Focus group discussion led to the identification of several factors that influence rehabilitation, disability, and health research productivity at MSIs. Such identified factors included, but were not limited to, heavy teaching and service loads, time management issues, lack of collaboration, limited mentors, insufficient financial resources, inadeqaute administrative and research culture, and insufficient state and donor funding. Focus group participants also suggested relevant topics and sources as informational materials for improving scientific productivity. Conclusion: The findings point to the need for MSIs to make greater financial and intellectual investments in their research infrastructure and culture. Moreover, federal research agencies should also consider making greater research capacity building and research and development funding investments at these institutions.
Abstract. BACKGROUND: Incessant migration trends of persons of color to the United
Purpose: This study examined and documented minority disability and health research leaders’ experiences and perspectives on career development challenges and success strategies. Methods: A sample of 15 African American, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Latino, and Asian research leaders as key informants participated in the inquiry. Research team members and external project advisory panel members collaboratively developed the interview protocol consisting of 8 questions designed to elicit information about career development factors. Trained interviewers conducted semistructured telephone interviews to collect data. Verbatim transcripts of the audiotapes and participant demographics were the primary data that were analyzed using NVivo (Version 10.0). Results: Individual sociocultural challenges (e.g., cultural barriers, language/communication issues, family life issues, and limited collaboration opportunities), institutional research environmental concerns (e.g., bureaucracy, alienation, insufficient research support funds, and discrimination), and federal research agency policy and systems context–induced issues (e.g., limited mentorship opportunities, inadequate supply of minority research leaders and role models, unhealthy competition, and lack of equal opportunity) emerged among key informants’ perspectives as important barriers. Identified success strategies included the need for early career investigators to build, expand, and use support networks, establish multidisciplinary collaborations, develop strong work ethic, enhance research skills (e.g., methodological and grant writing), and obtain capable mentorship. Conclusions: The aforementioned factors should be considered in the creation of new career development models and paradigms aimed at diversifying the scientific workforce.
Purpose: In the previous analysis of key informant perspectives on minority research leaders’ career development factors, we identified individual and sociocultural, institutional, and federal research agency (i.e., National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research; National Institutes of Health; Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research; Office of Disability, Aging, and Long-Term Care Policy) policy and systems-induced challenges. An analysis of their viewpoints about what policy and systems-induced facilitators can be considered as actionable for increasing the pool of seasoned minority researchers was not undertaken. Here in this companion study, data collected on 15 key informants’ perspectives regarding policy initiatives and strategies that can be considered by these agencies to diversify the behavioral, social science, clinical, and biomedical scientific workforce were analyzed. Methods: This companion analysis employed the same methods as reflected in the previous study. Results: Select federal research agency policy and systems-induced factors (i.e., research career pathways, social justice context, designated funding streams, and interprofessional multidisciplinary collaborations) emerged as important. Conclusions: The findings can inform the development of new or modified federal research agency sponsored field initiated strategies and internal policy and systems that could lead to an increased supply of seasoned minority investigators.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.