NIH's dedicated K23 trial pathway was associated with more K-trial leadership but no detectable gain in new trials

Wang, H.; Fu, H.; Tian, Z.

doi:10.64898/2026.10.09.758109

Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.64898/2026.10.09.758109

NIH's dedicated K23 trial pathway was associated with more K-trial leadership but no detectable gain in new trials

Wang, H.·Fu, H.·Tian, Z.

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Research funders often train investigators by funding a project, expecting the experience to produce leaders of the next one. Delivering the funded project and leading new work are different outcomes. In 2018 the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) created a dedicated clinical trial pathway for its K23 mentored career development awards. Using registry records for 1,847 K23 awardees and a language-model measurement corrected against blinded human review, we compared awardees whose awarded plans proposed their own trial with those whose plans did not, before and after the change. The pathway was followed by more leadership of the award-supported trial (difference in differences, 13.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 5.7 to 21.2) but no detectable gain in leadership of distinct new trials (-3.8; -14.4 to 6.9), including over seven years. The K-trial estimate exceeded the new-trial estimate by 17.4 points (5.3 to 29.7) under every measurement correction. The additional supported trials were registered with the awardee as principal investigator and started at rates similar to earlier ones, whereas whether more awardees led any trial depended on the correction. Because groups were defined by awarded plans, the design cannot fully separate changes in behaviour from changes in who was funded. A training pathway can raise delivery of the work it funds without a detectable increase in leadership of further trials. As NIH consolidates its career awards and ends K support for trial conduct, evaluations should measure both outcomes.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and education Preprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Wang, H., Fu, H., Tian, Z.. 2026-10-13. NIH's dedicated K23 trial pathway was associated with more K-trial leadership but no detectable gain in new trials. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.10.09.758109

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Preprint solicitation as a natural experiment in scholarly publishing

Preprinting is a growing and increasingly recognized mechanism for scientific communication and productivity and a way to facilitate global access to science. The interplay of preprinting practices with formal peer-reviewed publication is an open question that is now tractable to targeted analysis. Here, we take advantage of nearly a decade of preprint solicitation at Proceedings B to address this question, which offers a quasi-experimental setting for comparing outcomes for solicited preprints and traditionally submitted manuscripts. We used submission records from 15,368 manuscripts from 2018-2024 to assess whether preprint solicitation affects acceptance rates, journal scope, author geographic diversity, and post-publication uptake. Solicited manuscripts were accepted at nearly twice the rate of traditional submissions and received more downloads and citations after publication. Submission topics were broadly similar between the two routes, though solicited manuscripts showed marginally greater subject diversity. Geographic disparities favoring the Global North persisted, but acceptance rates for solicited manuscripts converged across regions, narrowing the gap seen in traditional submissions. These findings extend earlier work on this initiative and indicate that editor-driven solicitation can identify high-quality preprints, broaden geographic representation, and increase research visibility, offering a replicable model for journals seeking to diversify authorship while maintaining editorial standards.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2026

Biology Undergraduates Use of AI-Enabled Feedback to Revise Scientific Writing: Recipience and Barriers

Background: Instructors and education researchers are increasingly developing feedback with the assistance of generative AI, which we refer to as AI-enabled feedback, yet we do not know whether established understandings of feedback uptake and effectiveness apply similarly in AI-mediated contexts. This makes the recipience of AI-enabled feedback a central concern to understanding how to best support students in developing their scientific writing skills. This study examined how two teams of undergraduate biology students used AI-enabled feedback to revise their scientific writing, and the extent to which their revisions addressed that feedback. The teams revised their research proposal drafts after receiving AI-enabled feedback developed by their instructor with the aid of a custom AI tool. Results: Our findings show that AI-enabled feedback prompted actionable revision across both teams. Each team addressed approximately half of the feedback comments, indicating comparable levels of uptake despite their differing approaches to revision. We observed that both teams were inconsistent in providing the additional information and reasoning requested in the feedback, and they struggled to address comments requiring self-evaluation. Taken together, we see that students often addressed the more easily actionable parts of AI-enabled feedback while omitting more demanding revisions. Conclusions: These findings provide behavioral evidence of how students used AI-enabled feedback to revise their scientific writing. The observed patterns suggest that the content of AI-enabled feedback supported meaningful revision, while limitations in students agency, strategies, and volition likely shaped their implementation of comments. Although the degree of uptake observed in this study is encouraging, it is unlikely that a single application of generative AI within the feedback process will resolve all the challenges associated with feedback uptake.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2026

The Impact of Small-group Education on Student Wellbeing in Undergraduate Biology: a Student Perspective on Self-Determination Theory

Alarming reports about mental health have raised awareness of student wellbeing in STEM Education. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) implies that wellbeing can be improved by fulfilling the needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness. Educational design elements such as small-group teaching, peer feedback and offering a low-stakes practice environment can help fulfill these SDT needs. These elements were applied in a new academic skills course in our undergraduate Biology program. Here, we investigated how this affected the students sense of autonomy, competence and relatedness, and whether this was related to wellbeing. First, a survey among 48 students confirmed that student wellbeing is positively correlated to SDT fulfillment. Next, group interviews with students revealed that wellbeing is mostly dependent on relatedness, which is facilitated through small-group teaching in the first semester. Furthermore, students reported that (1) relatedness evolves through bonding with peers over the shared experience of struggle, (2) competence requires (peer) feedback and opportunities for growth, especially in laboratory coursework and (3) a structured, low-stakes environment supports competence, but without optimal challenge, also undermines a sense of autonomy. This illustrates how students perceive the effects of small-group educational activities on their wellbeing through the lens of Self-Determination Theory.

scientific communication and education↗