Senior Instructors and Assistant Professors in their first academic appointment may not have all the tools for an efficient start to their careers. Although many institutions provide access to mentoring programs and seminars on faculty development, the timing and format of the offerings often conflict with ongoing responsibilities of the faculty, particularly clinical faculty.

We established a collaboration between the Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) and the University of Rochester Medical Center Office for Faculty Development with the goal of developing a week-long Junior Faculty Core Curriculum that would better suit faculty schedules. We convened focus groups and with their help, identified themes for inclusion in the course. Speakers were identified from among local senior faculty. University leadership was enlisted in promoting the course. Individual speakers and course content were evaluated daily, at the end of the week-long course, and 6 months later. Planning for subsequent years incorporated the feedback. Yearly evaluations and subsequent course modification continued.

Junior faculty from nearly every department in the Medical Center were represented. There was high learner satisfaction and participation however several limitations were identified and addressed in subsequent years. The focus on principles and available resources, not specific skills or content was appropriate. Daily interactions among participants from a wide variety of departments fostered networking among faculty who may not otherwise have met and discussed common interests

The ultimate value of such an early, intensive faculty development program will depend on whether it equips junior faculty to organize, develop, and achieve their academic goals better than alternative formats. This will require further study.

This paper is the fourth in a 5-part series that focuses on educating and training the clinical and translational science workforce. The goal of this paper is to delineate components of effective career development programs that go beyond didactic training. All academic health centers with a Clinical and Translational Science Award have a KL2 career development award for junior faculty, and many also have a TL1 training program for predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows. The training across these programs varies, however junior investigators across the United States experience similar challenges. Junior investigators can get overwhelmed with the demands of building their own research program, particularly in academia. 1Often, they are sidetracked by competing demands that can derail their progress. In these situations, junior investigators experience frustration and may search for alternative career paths. By providing them with additional professional skills in the 5 domains of: (1) self-awareness; (2) selecting the right topic and securing funding; (3) getting adequate support; (4) working with others; and (5) managing yourself, your career, and your demands. We will give junior investigators additional tools to manage these demands and facilitate their own career success.

Previous studies have examined the impact of Clinical and Translational Science Awards programs on other outcomes, but not on grant seeking. The authors examined the effects on grant seeking of the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), a Clinical and Translational Science Awards institute at the University of Michigan.

We assessed over 63,000 grant proposals submitted at the University of Michigan in the years 2002–2012 using data from the university and MICHR’s Tracking Metrics and Reporting System. We used a retrospective, observational study of the dynamics of grant-seeking success and award funding. Heckman selection models were run to assess MICHR’s relationship with a proposal’s success (selection), and subsequently the award’s size (outcome). Models were run for all proposals and for clinical and translational research (CTR) proposals alone. Other covariates included proposal classification, type of grant award, academic unit, and year.

MICHR had a positive and statistically significant relationship with success for both proposal types. For all grants, MICHR was associated with a 29.6% increase in award size. For CTR grants, MICHR had a statistically nonsignificant relationship with award size.

MICHR’s infrastructure, created to enable and enhance CTR, has also created positive spillovers for a broader spectrum of research and grant seeking.

The Institute of Translational Health Sciences (ITHS) promotes and supports translational research collaboration between clinicians, communities, and investigators across the five-state Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI) region. The ITHS has developed a collaborative regional clinical research network, the Northwest Participant & Clinical Interactions Network (NW PCI), involving 12 diverse clinical health systems and academic institutions.

This descriptive article details NW PCI’s development, infrastructure and governance, tools, characteristics, and initial outcomes.

Regional NW PCI sites are conducting largely industry-sponsored studies; they are interested in including more grant-funded research. Regional NW PCI sites had over 1,240 open studies involving over 6700 patients in 2016. NW PCI trials are largely industry-sponsored; NW PCI sites are interested in including more grant-funded research. In its first three years, the NW PCI Coordinating Center facilitated regional sites’ participation in 34 new grant and contract applications across diverse topics.

The NW PCI model supports the goals of the developing CTSA Trial Innovation Network by increasing access to cutting-edge research across the Northwestern U.S., by supporting investigators seeking diverse populations, including those with rare diseases, for their research studies, and by providing settings to test implementation and dissemination of effective interventions.

Research organizations face challenges in creating infrastructures that cultivates and sustains interdisciplinary team science. The objective of this paper is to identify structural elements of organizations and training that promote team science.

We qualitatively analyzed the National Institutes of Health’s Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health, K12 using organizational psychology and team science theories to identify organizational design factors for successful team science and training.

Seven key design elements support team science: (1) semiformal meta-organizational structure, (2) shared context and goals, (3) formal evaluation processes, (4) meetings to promote communication, (5) role clarity in mentoring, (6) building interpersonal competencies among faculty and trainees, and (7) designing promotion and tenure and other organizational processes to support interdisciplinary team science.

This application of theory to a long-standing and successful program provides important foundational elements for programs and institutions to consider in promoting team science.

The glucocorticoid receptor (GR) is a key receptor involved in inflammatory responses and is influenced by sex steroids. This study measured GR expression on circulating leukocyte subtypes in males and females.

A total of 23 healthy adults (12 female) participated in this study. GR expression was measured in leukocyte subtypes using flow cytometry. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) gene expression of GR (NR3C1), GR β, TGF-β1 and 2, and glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper (GILZ) were determined by real-time polymerase chain reaction.

Leukocyte GR was lower in females, particularly in granulocytes, natural killer cells, and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (p≤0.01). GR protein expression was different across leukocyte subtypes, with higher expression in eosinophils compared with granulocytes, T lymphocytes, and natural killer cells (p<0.05). There was higher gene expression of GR β in males (p=0.03).

This is the first study to identify sexual dimorphism in GR expression in healthy adults using flow cytometry. These results may begin to explain the sexual dimorphism seen in many diseases and sex differences in glucocorticoid responsiveness.

Obtaining informed consent from prospective participants for research studies that include next-generation nucleotide sequencing (NGS) presents significant challenges because of the need to explain all the potential implications of participating, including the possible return of “incidental” findings, in easy-to-understand language.

After reviewing the consent processes at other institutions, we decided to supplement the protocol-specific informed consent form with the following: (1) a short pamphlet for the prospective participant that includes a series of questions that she or he is encouraged to ask the investigator, and (2) a more detailed companion guide for investigators to help them develop simple-language answers to the questions. Both documents are available to use or modify.

We propose an approach to obtaining informed consent for NGS studies that encourages discussion of key issues without creating a complex, comprehensive document for participants; it also maximizes investigator flexibility. We also suggest mechanisms to return restricted information to participants.

Science Cafés facilitated by the Clinical and Translational Science Institute of Southeast Wisconsin seek to increase health and scientific literacy through informal conversation between researchers and community members. The goal was to understand what factors have the greatest influence on attendees’ perceived changes in health and science literacy levels (PCHSL) to increase impact.

Previous research established the evaluation used in the Science Cafés to measure PCHSL. In this study, comparisons were made between (1) 2 different approaches to Science Cafés (Genomics Science Cafés or Health Science Cafés) and (2) regression models to show which factors best predicted PCHSL.

The approach of the Genomics Science Cafés series to Science Cafés showed a larger impact on PCHSL. Regression models suggest SES and education significantly contributes to PCHSL.

Insights for program development to have greater impact on PCHSL were identified. Continuing to optimize dissemination of research findings to the public is essential for improving community health and well-being.

Medical research strives to improve health; community-engaged research (CEnR) supports translation to the community.

This article describes the use of andragogical theory to develop asynchronous CEnR training.

A total of 43 researchers and community members completed at least one module. The majority (67%–100%) stated that training met their educational needs and noted a desire for more information.

The curriculum reinforced CEnR principles to enhance medical research.

How the productivity and careers of KL2 scholars compare with scholars receiving individual K-awards is unknown.

The productivity of KL2 scholars (n=21) at our institution was compared with that of K08 (n=34) and K23 (n=26) scholars.

KL2 and K23 scholars had greater productivity than K08 scholars (p=0.01). Professional advancement was similar among groups.

At our institution, scholarly productivity and professional advancement did not differ by type of K-award.