Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2022.09.11.507461

Leadership in PhD (LeaP): a longitudinal leadership skill building program for underrepresented biomedical research trainees

Doles, M. D.·Kang, J. Y.·Scholl, L. M.·Doles, J. D.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

AO_SCPLOWBSTRACTC_SCPLOWIncreasing diversity in the biomedical research workforce is a critical national issue. Particularly concerning is the lack of representation at more advanced career stages/in leadership positions. While there are numerous institutional initiatives promoting professional research skills (i.e. grant writing, presenting, networking) for underrepresented (UR) PhD trainees, there are comparatively fewer opportunities for leadership development. We present a blueprint for Leadership in PhD (LeaP), a cohort-based program aiming to equip UR biomedical research trainees with skills to succeed as academic, industry, and community leaders. In contrast to intensive short-term programs or workshops, LeaP is a longitudinal 4-year experience with an emphasis on self-directed and experiential learning. First year trainees receive foundational didactic instruction on core leadership concepts coupled with facilitated peer discussions and one-on-one coaching support. We outline a program evaluation framework that assesses student learning, satisfaction, and program efficacy. Evaluation data from the inaugural year is presented and discussed.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Doles, M. D., Kang, J. Y., Scholl, L. M., Doles, J. D.. 2022-09-13. Leadership in PhD (LeaP): a longitudinal leadership skill building program for underrepresented biomedical research trainees. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.11.507461

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

Promoting Transparent, Fair, and Inclusive Practices in Grantmaking: Lessons from the Open and Equitable Model Funding Program.

The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) has been instrumental in promoting open and equitable scholarship to enhance academic researchs transparency and accessibility. In 2020, the ORFG formed the Equity & Open Science Working Group, leading to the launch of the Open & Equitable Model Funding Program in 2021. This program aimed to refine grantmaking processes for broader inclusivity and equitable open scholarship practices. The program gathered a cohort of 11 funding organizations and focused on applying various proposed interventions within existing funding programs to improve grantmaking practices. The initiative highlighted the importance of targeted intervention selection and the need for delimited goal-setting, revealing challenges in implementation due to limited resources and the complexity of the processes involved. Participants valued the pilot for its structured approach and opportunities for shared learning despite some facing complexities in fully implementing the interventions. The ORFGs future approach involves flexible intervention selection, effective resource management, and fostering a collaborative community, aiming for a more inclusive and practical application of open scholarship principles.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

Unveiling the Emotional Turmoil: How Covid-19 impacted researchers and the pursuit of emotional well-being in academia.

The Covid-19 crisis unprecedentedly required researchers to adapt to significant changes in their work and personal lives. Our study aims to fill this gap analysing the Covid-19 emotional impact and confinement potential disruptions on researchers activity (specifically, those related to working conditions, caring responsibilities, health, balance, and social support) considering the modulating role played by age, gender, and job position. An online survey was distributed during the first lockdown period of the Covid-19 pandemic, and answers from 1301 researchers (ECR %, senior researchers %) working in Sciences (28.1%), Social Sciences (25.9%), Humanities (16.2%), Health (16.2%) and in Engineering and Architecture (13.5%) were collected. The study highlights that the initial lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic had a significant emotional impact on researchers, exacerbating pre-existing emotional distress and burnout within this group. Factors such as age, health, gender, and difficulties in balancing work and family life were associated with an increased risk of burnout and emotional distress. Lack of social support was identified as a significant risk factor, while the academic culture prioritizing productivity over well-being contributed to the issue. These findings underscore the need for greater support and cultural changes in academia to preserve researchers mental health and prevent the chronicization of mental health issues in young academics.

scientific communication and education↗