危机期间对早期职业研究人员的机构支持:COVID-19大流行案例研究。

IF 3.8 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Healthcare Leadership Pub Date : 2025-08-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JHL.S533632
Lucy O Alejandro, Erika Temprano, Monica Kowalczyk, Rachel K Wolfson, Valerie G Press, Vineet M Arora, Anna Volerman
{"title":"危机期间对早期职业研究人员的机构支持:COVID-19大流行案例研究。","authors":"Lucy O Alejandro, Erika Temprano, Monica Kowalczyk, Rachel K Wolfson, Valerie G Press, Vineet M Arora, Anna Volerman","doi":"10.2147/JHL.S533632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To understand how institutions can support faculty during crises in biomedical research, this study examined early career researchers (ECRs) experiences with institutional supports during the COVID-19 pandemic and their perspectives on how institutions can support professional recovery.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>This national, cross-sectional study evaluated professional and personal-related institutional supports offered to ECRs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of these supports, and additional supports needed for professional recovery. An online survey was distributed electronically in fall 2021 to all individuals with F32 or K-level awards through the National Institutes of Health in 2020. Descriptive statistics, chi square tests, and thematic analysis summarized findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 4,440 ECRs contacted, 1,587 ECRs (35.7%) responded to the survey, and 1,527 (34.4%) met inclusion criteria. Most respondents reported their institutions offered programs or services during the COVID-19 pandemic (81.3%, n=1241), including professional support(s) (76.8%, n=1172) and personal support(s) (43.6%, n=666). The most impactful support was mentoring programs, with 49.9% (n=402/806) reporting that it had positive impact, followed by personal assistants (48.4%, n=60/123) and bridge funding (for research: 42.4%, n=156/358; for salary: 41.7%, n=115/276). For coaching programs, bridge funding for salary, and elder care services, respondents indicated significant differences in the impact between expanded or new supports versus continued existing supports. Regarding institutional supports needed to support professional recovery, responses fell into six themes: caregiving support, mental health support, financial support, work support, career development support, and employment support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides novel insights into ECRs' perspectives on the supports offered by institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic and additional areas of need for professional recovery. Institutions must invest in relevant, effective, and accessible supports for ECRs to help them persist in scientific careers, particularly during periods of disruption and uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":44346,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Leadership","volume":"17 ","pages":"417-430"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404187/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional Supports for Early Career Researchers During Crises: COVID-19 Pandemic Case Study.\",\"authors\":\"Lucy O Alejandro, Erika Temprano, Monica Kowalczyk, Rachel K Wolfson, Valerie G Press, Vineet M Arora, Anna Volerman\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JHL.S533632\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To understand how institutions can support faculty during crises in biomedical research, this study examined early career researchers (ECRs) experiences with institutional supports during the COVID-19 pandemic and their perspectives on how institutions can support professional recovery.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>This national, cross-sectional study evaluated professional and personal-related institutional supports offered to ECRs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of these supports, and additional supports needed for professional recovery. An online survey was distributed electronically in fall 2021 to all individuals with F32 or K-level awards through the National Institutes of Health in 2020. Descriptive statistics, chi square tests, and thematic analysis summarized findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 4,440 ECRs contacted, 1,587 ECRs (35.7%) responded to the survey, and 1,527 (34.4%) met inclusion criteria. Most respondents reported their institutions offered programs or services during the COVID-19 pandemic (81.3%, n=1241), including professional support(s) (76.8%, n=1172) and personal support(s) (43.6%, n=666). The most impactful support was mentoring programs, with 49.9% (n=402/806) reporting that it had positive impact, followed by personal assistants (48.4%, n=60/123) and bridge funding (for research: 42.4%, n=156/358; for salary: 41.7%, n=115/276). For coaching programs, bridge funding for salary, and elder care services, respondents indicated significant differences in the impact between expanded or new supports versus continued existing supports. Regarding institutional supports needed to support professional recovery, responses fell into six themes: caregiving support, mental health support, financial support, work support, career development support, and employment support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides novel insights into ECRs' perspectives on the supports offered by institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic and additional areas of need for professional recovery. Institutions must invest in relevant, effective, and accessible supports for ECRs to help them persist in scientific careers, particularly during periods of disruption and uncertainty.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44346,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Healthcare Leadership\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"417-430\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404187/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Healthcare Leadership\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S533632\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S533632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为了了解机构如何在生物医学研究危机期间为教师提供支持,本研究调查了早期职业研究人员(ecr)在COVID-19大流行期间获得机构支持的经历,以及他们对机构如何支持职业恢复的看法。受试者和方法:这项全国性的横断面研究评估了在COVID-19大流行期间向ecr提供的专业和个人相关的机构支持、这些支持的影响以及专业恢复所需的额外支持。一项在线调查于2021年秋季通过美国国立卫生研究院(National Institutes of Health)在2020年以电子方式分发给所有获得F32或k级奖励的个人。描述性统计、卡方检验和专题分析总结了研究结果。结果:在接触的4440个ecr中,有1587个ecr(35.7%)回应调查,1527个ecr(34.4%)符合纳入标准。大多数受访者表示,他们的机构在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间提供了项目或服务(81.3%,n=1241),包括专业支持(76.8%,n=1172)和个人支持(43.6%,n=666)。最具影响力的支持是指导计划,49.9% (n=402/806)的受访者表示其产生了积极影响,其次是私人助理(48.4%,n=60/123)和过桥资金(研究:42.4%,n=156/358;工资:41.7%,n=115/276)。对于教练项目、工资过桥资金和老年人护理服务,受访者表示,扩大或新的支持与继续现有支持之间的影响存在显著差异。关于支持职业康复所需的机构支持,回答分为六个主题:护理支持、心理健康支持、财务支持、工作支持、职业发展支持和就业支持。结论:本研究为ecr在COVID-19大流行期间机构提供的支持以及专业康复需求的其他领域的观点提供了新的见解。科研机构必须为ecr提供相关、有效和可获得的支持,帮助他们坚持科学事业,特别是在中断和不确定时期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional Supports for Early Career Researchers During Crises: COVID-19 Pandemic Case Study.

Purpose: To understand how institutions can support faculty during crises in biomedical research, this study examined early career researchers (ECRs) experiences with institutional supports during the COVID-19 pandemic and their perspectives on how institutions can support professional recovery.

Subjects and methods: This national, cross-sectional study evaluated professional and personal-related institutional supports offered to ECRs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of these supports, and additional supports needed for professional recovery. An online survey was distributed electronically in fall 2021 to all individuals with F32 or K-level awards through the National Institutes of Health in 2020. Descriptive statistics, chi square tests, and thematic analysis summarized findings.

Results: Among 4,440 ECRs contacted, 1,587 ECRs (35.7%) responded to the survey, and 1,527 (34.4%) met inclusion criteria. Most respondents reported their institutions offered programs or services during the COVID-19 pandemic (81.3%, n=1241), including professional support(s) (76.8%, n=1172) and personal support(s) (43.6%, n=666). The most impactful support was mentoring programs, with 49.9% (n=402/806) reporting that it had positive impact, followed by personal assistants (48.4%, n=60/123) and bridge funding (for research: 42.4%, n=156/358; for salary: 41.7%, n=115/276). For coaching programs, bridge funding for salary, and elder care services, respondents indicated significant differences in the impact between expanded or new supports versus continued existing supports. Regarding institutional supports needed to support professional recovery, responses fell into six themes: caregiving support, mental health support, financial support, work support, career development support, and employment support.

Conclusion: This study provides novel insights into ECRs' perspectives on the supports offered by institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic and additional areas of need for professional recovery. Institutions must invest in relevant, effective, and accessible supports for ECRs to help them persist in scientific careers, particularly during periods of disruption and uncertainty.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Healthcare Leadership
Journal of Healthcare Leadership HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Efficient and successful modern healthcare depends on a growing group of professionals working together as an interdisciplinary team. However, many forces shape the delivery of healthcare; changes are being driven by the markets, transformations in concepts of health and wellbeing, technology and research and discovery. Dynamic leadership will guide these necessary transformations. The Journal of Healthcare Leadership is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on leadership for the healthcare professions. The publication strives to amalgamate current and future healthcare professionals and managers by providing key insights into leadership progress and challenges to improve patient care. The journal aspires to inform key decision makers and those professionals with ambitions of leadership and management; it seeks to connect professionals who are engaged in similar endeavours and to provide wisdom from those working in other industries. Senior and trainee doctors, nurses and allied healthcare professionals, medical students, healthcare managers and allied leaders are invited to contribute to this publication
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信