Weavers, Karen M.

When COVID-19 caused worldwide cancellations of summer research immersion programs in 2020, Mayo Clinic rallied to create an alternate virtual experience called Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR). SFIR was designed not only to ensure the continuance of science pathways training for undergraduate scientists but also to support undergraduate mental wellbeing, given the known pandemic stressors. A total of 170 participants took part in the program and were surveyed pre-post for outcomes in biomedical research career knowledge, biomedical research career interest, research skills confidence, and three dimensions of mental wellbeing. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following participation in SFIR. The participants’ mean research skills confidence also rose between 0.08 and 1.32 points on a 7-point scale across 12 items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Success in science pathways support was accompanied by positive shifts in participant mental wellbeing. Measurable decreases in stress (Perceived Stress Scale, p < 0.0001) accompanied gains in resilience (Brief Resilience Scale, p < 0.0001) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale, p = 0.0005). Collectively, the data suggest that core objectives of traditional in-person summer research programming can be accomplished virtually and that these programs can simultaneously impact student wellbeing. This theoretical framework is particularly salient during COVID-19, but the increased accessibility of virtual programs such as SFIR can continue to bolster science education pathways long after the pandemic is gone.

Problem Case-based learning is an established means of educating students in law, business, and medicine; however, this methodology is not often applied to educating translational biomedical researchers. The application of case-based learning to translational biomedical research education allows scholars to actively engage with real-world material and apply their newfound knowledge as it is acquired. Approach Through the Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCaTS), three courses were delivered in 2009–2017 which emphasized case-based learning in clinical and translational science, entrepreneurship, and individualized medicine. Quantitative measures collected in student course reviews upon course completion were analyzed. Additionally, products arising from each course were identified, including publications and startups pitched. Outcomes Analyses demonstrate that case-based learning techniques are well suited to graduate biomedical research education. Furthermore, case studies can be employed throughout the entire clinical and translational spectrum, from basic and preclinical work through to clinical and population-based learning. Next Steps Within CCaTS, next steps include creating case-based courses in regulatory and team science to continue to allow scholars to learn and apply these critical skills to real-world material. The goal is to continue to provide immersive training opportunities in areas of clinical and translational science that cannot be readily learned in a traditional lecture-based class setting.

Introduction: Lack of health equity ultimately leads to unequal treatment of diverse patients and contributes to the growing disparities seen in national health. Academic medical centers should consider providing health care providers and biomedical researchers training on how to identify and address health disparities. Methods: The authors led an introductory health disparities course for graduate students and research and clinical fellows at an academic medical center in the Midwest. We compared pre/postcourse assessments to determine changes in learners’ perceptions and knowledge of health disparities using an unpaired analysis to permit inclusion of responses provided only at baseline. Results: Sixty-two learners completed preassessment, with 56 completing the postassessment (90%). In the postcourse assessment, learners reported an increase in knowledge of disparities and had changes in their perceptions of health disparities linked to treatment of different patient groups based on demographic characteristics. There was a statistically significant difference in learners’ perceptions of how patients are treated based on gender identity (P=0.02) and sexual orientation (P=0.04). Conclusions: The results detail how an academic medical center can provide training on health disparities for diverse learners. This study underscores the influence of health disparities from the perspective of learners who conduct biomedical research and patient care. This course serves a model for introductory-level health disparities courses.