Mentored training and its association with dissemination and implementation research output: a quasi-experimental evaluation

Abstract

BackgroundThere is continued need to evaluate training programs in dissemination and implementation (D&I) research. Scientific products yielded from trainees are an important and objective measure to understand capacity growth within the D&I field. This study evaluates our mentored training program in terms of scientific productivity among applicants.MethodsPost-doctoral and early career cancer researchers were recruited and applied to the R25 Mentored Training for Dissemination and Implementation Research in Cancer (MT-DIRC) between 2014 and 2017. Using application details and publicly available bibliometric and funding data, we compared selected fellows with unsuccessful applicants (nonfellows). We extracted Scopus citations and US federal grant funding records for all applicants (N=102). Funding and publication abstracts were de-identified and coded for D&I focus and aggregated to the applicant level for analysis. Logistic regression models were explored separately for the odds of 1) a D&I publication and 2) US federal grant funding post year of application among fellows (N=55) and nonfellows (N=47). Additional models were constructed including independent variables that attenuated the program’s association by 5 percent or more. Only US-based applicants (N=87) were included in grant funding analysis.ResultsFellows and nonfellows were similar across several demographic characteristics. Fellows were more than 3 times more likely than nonfellows to have grant funding after MT-DIRC application year (OR 3.2; 95% CI: 1.1-11.0) while controlling for time since application year; the association estimate was 3.1 (95% CI: 1.0-11.0) after adjusting for both cancer research area and previous grant funding. For publications, fellows were almost 4 times more likely to publish D&I focused work adjusting for time (OR 3.8; 95% CI: 1.7-9.0). This association lessened after adjusting for previous D&I publication and years since undergraduate degree (OR 2.9; 95% CI: 1.2-7.5).ConclusionsWe document the association of a mentored training approach with built-in networks of peers to yield productive D&I researchers. Future evaluation efforts could be expanded to include other terms of longer-term productivity such as policy or practice change as additional objective measures. D&I research trainings in the US and internationally should consider common evaluation measures.Contributions to the literature• The number of trainings in dissemination and implementation (D&I) continues to expand globally. Few D&I training evaluations are published and those evaluations reported tend to be small-scale and short term with limited measures of impact.• This study reports that our training program enhances academic productivity and highlights that mentored training for D&I scholars is an essential approach for building capacity for D&I research.• Using publicly available data, the methods in this study could be replicated with other D&I trainings to compare impact across fields.

The “secret sauce” for a mentored training program: qualitative perspectives of trainees in implementation research for cancer control

“…New found confidence as leaders in a relatively newer research field such as D&I research suggests the value of bidirectional relationships with membership in a recognized mentoring network, thus building skills and scientific self-efficacy. The qualitative inquiry provided unique insights which enhance our previous quantitative findings [21,33,34] and add depth to our program's conceptual framwork, specifically in the impact domain.…”

“…Our strategy in selecting participants was, in part, to ensure that we collected experiences from those fellows who faired the best, and those that did not in terms of targeted program outcomes. As described in other publications [33,34], we examined pre and post skills data to determine skills gained during the program. A skill gain score was calculated by taking the difference of each of the 55 fellows' overall D&I skills average at time one (pre-institute) from the average at time 3 (18 months in the program).…”

Collaboration Networks of the Implementation Science Centers for Cancer Control: A Social Network Analysis

“…Trainees and those with beginner IS expertise have lower access to collaboration in the ISC 3 network. Mentoring the next generation of IS investigators is imperative to "grow the network younger" and to assure that early-career members have equal access to collaborative activities and can increase scienti c production overall (20)(21)(22)(23). The ISC 3 can increase access to the network by using post-doctoral funding streams to connect early investigators to the larger ISC 3 network, providing a platform to connect with other peers in the IS eld from several other universities.…”

Collaboration Networks of the Implementation Science Centers for Cancer Control (ISC3): A Social Network Analysis

“…Mentoring the next generation of IS investigators is imperative to "grow the network younger" and to assure that early career members have equal access to collaborative activities and can increase scienti c production overall (32)(33)(34)(35). We posit that early career and underrepresented minority researchers occupying central nodes is essential for a healthy scienti c collaboration network.…”