Thyroid cancer survivors are at increased risk of SPMs, which may be related to disease-specific treatments or genetic predisposition.

National reports and funding mandates have called for trainee-centered PhD and postdoctoral training and the need to support diverse career outcomes. As a result, career and professional development (CPD) resources have expanded at several institutions. Despite the growth of innovative and impactful CPD resources, access to and awareness of resources have been inconsistent and inequitable for graduate and postdoctoral trainees. In the current model, core education occurs in two unconnected ways: faculty research mentors provide scientific competencies training, while CPD educators provide transferable competencies training, which is separate from the curriculum and optional at most institutions. Research mentors are influential in supporting trainee engagement with CPD programs; however, most are either unaware of the rapidly growing opportunities or may not see the direct benefit to scientific development and productivity. Due to this disconnect, some trainees can be inadvertently distanced from CPD resources, leading to more inequities among groups. To bridge this gap, here we propose a realignment of the current model via a set of practical and collaborative solutions providing benefit to all stakeholders. With greater awareness and collaboration, research mentors and CPD educators can complement each other’s expertise to better support trainee experiences and outcomes.

No abstract

Career and professional development competencies are critical for biomedical PhD and postdoctoral training. In the current educational landscape, programs that meet these competencies are offered and attended in an ad hoc manner.

Postdoctoral training enables research independence and professional readiness. National reports have emphasized professional development as a critical component of this training period. In response, many institutions are establishing transferable skills training workshops for postdocs; however, the lack of structured programs and an absence of methods to assess outcomes beyond participant satisfaction surveys are critical gaps in postdoctoral training. To address these shortcomings, we took the approach of structured programming and developed a method for controlled assessment of outcomes. Our program You3 (You, Your Team, Your Project), co-designed by postdoctoral fellows, focused on discussing specific management and leadership skills agnostic of ultimate career path(s) in a structured manner. We then measured outcomes in a controlled manner, by systematically comparing perceived knowledge and growth as indicators of awareness and confidence in participants against that of non-participants as the control group. You3 participants self-rated greater growth in targeted competencies compared to non-participants independent of the number of years of training. This growth was shown by multiple criteria including self-reporting and associative analysis. Correspondingly, You3 participants reported greater knowledge in 75% of the modules when compared to controls. These data indicate that structured learning, where postdocs commit to a curriculum via a cohort-structure, leads to positive outcomes and provides a framework for programs to assess outcomes in a rigorous manner.

No abstract

Career and professional development competencies are critical for biomedical PhD and postdoctoral training. In the current educational landscape, programs that meet these competencies are offered and attended in an ad hoc manner. During the COVID-19 pandemic and the accompanying switch to virtual learning, our team observed a surge in interest for our weekly non-sequential programs. In this study, we surveyed our learners to better understand motivators for attending these programs during the pandemic and to identify barriers for participating in such events before and during Work-From-Home. Our data indicate that conflict with research responsibilities, time spent to get to the event location, and planning time to attend are all significant barriers to engagement. Notably, feelings of being overwhelmed, which increased slightly during the pandemic, stood out as an identified barrier. Per our results, the virtual format was an attraction. While 58% of respondents would prefer to access professional development programs virtually in the future, almost 42% indicated a preference for in-person events when normalcy resumes as the physical presence of an instructor and of peers result in a deeper engagement. Our collective analysis here suggests that learners will benefit from a hybrid or combination of synchronous and asynchronous career and professional development programming in the future, even post-pandemic, to reduce identified barriers. Alongside hybrid learning engagements, we strongly recommend structured time for learners to enhance their professional competencies, enabled by a commitment from departments and faculty mentors to enable equity in professional skill building and fostering lifelong growth mindset.

Conferences play an important role in enabling trainees to develop and apply competencies in science, in communication, and in networking during biomedical PhD and postdoctoral training. This article offers guidelines for trainees on how to use conferences to initiate, sustain, and strengthen connections, including in virtual conference formats which could become the norm in the future. Additionally, it provides tips for expanding professional networks via broad mechanisms such as informational interviews. Recommendations in this manuscript are applicable to trainees pursuing diverse career paths in different STEM fields including education, scientific research, policy, advocacy, consulting, and communication.