FASEB BioAdvances

The Post-baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP), established by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) at the National Institutes of Health in 2000, was a research-intense, one-year training program for recent college graduates from backgrounds uncommon in science who intended to matriculate with a PhD or MD/PhD program in preparation for an eventual career in biomedical research. Case Western Reserve University had an NIGMS-supported PREP (CasePREP) from 2007 to 2025, the year NIGMS terminated the PREP funding mechanism. A major goal of CasePREP was to prepare post-baccalaureate trainees (termed Scholars) for graduate school, and major metrics of success were measured as Scholars who a) matriculated in and b) completed PhD or MD/PhD programs. A major goal of NIGMS-supported PREPs was the retention of these scientists in the biomedical research workforce. We report here the extent that CasePREP met program goals as well as the economic and scientific impact NIGMS-supported PREP has had for a variety of stakeholders. Data from 18 CasePREP cohorts included self-reported (surveys, interviews, questionnaires) and public data (websites, PubMed, NIH Reporter). Descriptive statistics and large language models were used to describe the major outcomes related to program goals and a new resilience course as well as Scholar productivity and contribution to science. Between 2007 and 2025, CasePREP was awarded $5.6 million USD and trained 108 Scholars. Most (89%) Scholars resided outside of Ohio prior to the start of CasePREP, with 38.89% from Puerto Rico. Almost all (98%) Scholars completed the one-year program in Cleveland, Ohio, and of those, 83% entered a PhD or MD/PhD program. As of September 2025, 46 Scholars have completed a PhD program, two Scholars have completed an MD/PhD program, and 27 are still in training. The attrition rate for CasePREP Scholars in graduate school is currently 14.77%, much lower than the attrition rates of national PhD programs. Most CasePREP Scholars (69.44%) are co-authors on one or more published manuscripts, and these 406 published works have garnered 14,261 total citations, with an average 35.04 citations per publication. Termination of PREP represents a five-year loss of [~]$2.7 million USD to CasePREP, a budget that would have trained an additional 30 Scholars. CasePREP was a great success as measured by its major outcomes. CasePREP Scholars have persisted in science and have made substantial contributions to the scientific workforce and enterprise. PREPs in general provided a crucial bridge for research talents who had little prior research opportunities to realize their potential and career goals. NIGMS termination of PREP support has negative economic consequences and endangers an important pathway to a career in science for Americans who would not otherwise have similar opportunities.

Aim/PurposeTodays biomedical researchers are expected to apply understanding of basic biology to improve human health. Meeting this goal requires mastery of both laboratory and population sciences, each of which has its own knowledge base, techniques, and training paradigms. BackgroundEmory Universitys "Molecules-to-Mankind" (M2M) doctoral pathway was established in 2009 to be an evolving model of interdisciplinary PhD education. M2M supplements fellows home programs, ensuring they receive training in both population and laboratory sciences. MethodologyThe present paper describes the M2M program in detail. Surveys of faculty and fellows were also carried out, and the results are presented herein. ContributionThe M2M program follows a unique model by which doctoral students receive training in both population and laboratory sciences. The present paper describes this model, such that the information can be disseminated to other educational institutions interested in implementing similar programs. FindingsThis unique model facilitates engagement of stakeholders including the fellows home program, dissertation advisor, and Emorys professional schools. Recruited across biomedical PhD and MD/PhD programs, fellows have diverse research experiences and represent "spokes" bound together by the M2M "hub." This hubs central feature is a weekly seminar class where fellows and faculty members gather for open discussion with interdisciplinary speakers with successful research careers, emphasizing speakers who have tied laboratory and population sciences in their own work. This forum provides an encouraging environment for dialogue on all aspects of biomedical research from the science itself, to the speakers career path, and the logistics of garnering institutional support and building transdisciplinary collaborations. A decade since its inception, M2M has a proven track record of shaping early-stage careers for its 49 alumni to date. Recommendations for PractitionersEngaging trainees outside their home doctoral programs can have positive implications on overall quality of education. Recommendation for ResearchersAs interdisciplinary models grow ever more important in biomedical sciences, it is important to further examine the best teaching methods for training the next generation of scientists. Impact on SocietyInterdisciplinary training at the doctoral level is important to produce future cohorts of engaged and versatile scientific leaders. Future ResearchFuture research should continue to explore novel methods of training graduate students at the doctoral level.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed and exacerbated gender biases in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine. Accumulating evidence suggests that female scientists productivity dropped during the initial lockdown period. With more time being spent on caregiving responsibilities, women may be struggling to collaborate on grant applications and launch new experiments. Scientists with disabilities or who belong to Indigenous nations or communities of color may have less time to devote to research due to health, family, or community needs. Collateral damage in this situation, the appropriate integration of sex, gender, and other identity characteristics in research content may also suffer. Sex and gender are better attended to when female scientists form part of the research team. Research funding agencies have a role to play in mitigating these effects by putting in place gender equity policies that support all applicants and ensure research quality. Accordingly, a national health research funder implemented gender policy changes that included extending deadlines and factoring sex and gender into COVID-19 grant requirements. Following these changes, the funder received more applications from female scientists, awarded a greater proportion of grants to female compared to male scientists, and received and funded more grant applications that considered sex and gender in the content of COVID-19 research. Whether or not these strategies will be sufficient in the long-term to prevent widening of the gender gap in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine requires continued monitoring and oversight. Further work is urgently required to mitigate inequities associated with identity characteristics beyond gender.

PhD-trained scientists are essential contributors to the workforce in diverse employment sectors that include academia, industry, government, and non-profit organizations. Hence, best practices for training the future biomedical workforce are of national concern. Complementing coursework and laboratory research training, many institutions now offer professional training that enables career exploration and develops a broad set of skills critical to various career paths. The National Institutes of Health funded academic institutions to design innovative programming to enable this professional development through a mechanism known as Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST). Programming at the BEST awardee institutions included career panels, skill-building workshops, job-searching workshops, site visits, and internships. An initial concern was since doctoral training is lengthy and requires focused attention on dissertation research, having students participate in additional complementary training activities might lengthen time to degree and hamper student research productivity. To address this concern, using time to degree and publication records as measures of efficiency and productivity, metrics were analyzed from ten BEST awardee institutions. Comparing doctoral students who participated to those who did not, results revealed that across these diverse academic institutions, there were no differences in time to degree or manuscript output. Furthermore, a few institutions even demonstrated a positive correlation between participation in career and professional development activities and productivity. Our findings suggest that doctoral students should be encouraged to participate in career and professional development opportunities to ensure their preparedness for a variety of diverse and important careers in the workforce. Significance StatementOur study is unique in that it compiled doctoral degree durations at ten different universities, recorded individual participation in career and professional development activities in terms of dosage, and tracked individual engagement in real-time rather than relying on surveys sent to trainees after graduation. Participation in career and professional development activities, including internships, did not decrease efficiency or productivity. Our findings suggest that doctoral students should be encouraged to participate in career and professional development opportunities to ensure their preparedness for a variety of diverse and important careers in the workforce.

When a biomedical or basic science doctoral (PhD) student considers whether or not to become a Principal Investigator (PI), they typically base their decisions on anecdotal data from a limited number of faculty mentors. Alternatively, they may look online for guidance and be met with biased opinions rather than unbiased, comprehensive data. We sought to address this gap by anonymously surveying active faculty at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (CU Anschutz) to gain more clarity on the daily life of a PI, the decisions they made as they navigated their career path, and which skills were valuable for securing a faculty position. We also identified important factors in choosing a postdoctoral lab. We found that the majority of PIs would recommend becoming a PI and thought positively of the career path, with most feeling content. But attitudes differed between faculty of different ranks. Further, in addition to scientific vision, hard work, and publications, luck was also deemed as an important factor in becoming and succeeding as a PI. We present our findings so that they may serve as a resource for graduate trainees who are considering a PI/academic research career path. In addition, the information may guide future training plans to optimize achievement of their dream career.

An analysis of over 2.2 million NIH-funded research papers published between 1990 and 2024 reveals that there have been marked declines in the relative and absolute numbers of basic-science oriented publications. In 1990, nearly 60% of NIH-funded publications reported on basic science, with that proportion declining to 24% in 2024. The absolute number of basic science publications increased after the NIH budget doubling of 1998-2023, but at a slower rate than for human-focused publications. After the 2011-2013 budget shocks, the absolute number of basic science publications declined. These data support concerns about the long-term trajectory of NIHs support for basic science.

BackgroundThe main mission of NIH-sponsored institutional training programs such as the T32 is to provide strong research and career training for early career scientists, while preparing those individuals to become leaders working to meet the health-related research needs of the nation. One of the main avenues to pursue health-related research is becoming research faculty at an academic institution. It is therefore important to know whether these programs are succeeding in this mission, or, if barriers exist that prevent trainees from pursuing these careers. MethodsOur institution currently trains ~ 2400 post-doctoral scholars per year, approximately 5% of whom are enrolled in one of our 33 T32 programs. In this study, we 1) compare the professional outcomes of T32 trainees with non-T32 trainees at our institution, and 2) survey past and current T32 trainees in a subset of high-performing cardiovascular programs about the barriers and enablers they experienced to pursuing research-oriented careers. ResultsFormer T32 trainees are significantly more likely to attain appointments as primarily research faculty members, compared to other trainees. Trainees report a perceived lack of stability, the paucity of open positions, and the publish or perish competitive mentality of academia as their top reasons for abandoning careers in academia. However, they were still more likely to choose research over clinical careers after participating in a dedicated T32 program. ConclusionsOur results support the conclusion that structured training programs strengthen the pipeline of young scientists pursuing careers in academic research, including those from underrepresented backgrounds. However, T32 postdoctoral researchers are held back from pursuing academic careers by a perceived lack of stability and high competition for faculty positions. FundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Over the past two decades, Higher Education Institutions have increasingly prioritised transferrable skills to enhance graduate employability. Graduate Attributes (GAs) now act as key indicators of student competencies for both learners and employers. Final-year research projects, typically high in credit value, represent capstone experiences that promote subject expertise and GA development through research, written work, and oral presentations. This study analyses pre- and post-project survey data from RQF Level 6 biomedical and biomolecular science students at a Russell Group University over four years (2019-2023). Most projects were laboratory-based, though the 2020-2021 cohort completed theirs remotely due to COVID-19. Students reflected on expectations and experiences of GA development, subject knowledge, and employability. Initial responses revealed anxiety and uncertainty, particularly among the 2020-2021 cohort, but most anticipated gains in skills and employability. Post-project feedback confirmed this, identifying critical thinking, confidence, resilience, collaboration, and future focus as key outcomes. Digital capability was notably strengthened, especially during remote delivery. The findings emphasise the importance of a shared understanding of GAs in bioscience education and the value of embedding structured reflection and preparatory support to help students recognise and articulate their evolving skills.

It is widely recognized that funding for biomedical research supports the development of major medical advances. However, little systematic effort has been made to determine whether a link exists between the types of funding opportunities that are available to scientists and progress towards new treatments in the clinic. To better understand this relationship, we analyzed the funding opportunities offered by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) over a span of thirty-two years, together with the resulting portfolio of applications and awards. We found NIH funding opportunity announcements became more numerous and increasingly clinically oriented over that span, following a trend that parallels the increasing clinical and translational orientation of both NIH grant applications and NIH-funded publications. Surprisingly, this increase appears to be independent of the representation of clinician-scientists in the NIH workforce.

Summer research experiences expose undergraduate students to biomedical research in a laboratory or clinical setting, but often do not incorporate formal learning on scientific communication. Proper written and oral communication of science is essential to succeed in biomedical fields. This study examined whether participation in a science communication series (SCS) would increase gains in research and written communication abilities among students participated in the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Summer Research Internship Program. Surveys were administered at the beginning and end of the program to evaluate their summer undergraduate research experience (SURE). Positive personal and professional gains in research and communication skills were identified through participation in both SURE and SCS. Participation in the SCS also significantly improved the quality and presentation of research abstracts. Focused learning in science communication during SUREs would improve undergraduate students personal and professional abilities in biomedical research and medicine.

In July 2021, sixteen months into the Covid-19 pandemic, the institutional climate for PhD training in the School of Medicine was assessed for a second time. This survey of graduate students occurred 1 year after initial surveys of graduate students and training faculty in July 2020. The 2021 survey was completed by 99 PhD students in 11 PhD-granting programs. To allow comparisons between years, most of the 2021 questions were repeated with only minor edits. A few items were added to assess impacts of school-wide town hall meetings, a new PhD career club program, and enlarged mental health services. Several themes emerged. Students remain extremely concerned about the pandemics impact upon their training and long-term career prospects. They worry specifically about pandemic related reductions in research productivity and networking opportunities. Many students successfully adapted to laboratory research under pandemic restrictions but suffer from the continuing lack of social interaction even after in-person work hours increased. Symptoms of anxiety and/or depression persist amongst 46% of the students, as compared to 51% in 2020. Nearly 80% of students continue to report strong satisfaction with mentoring relationships with their dissertation advisors, but to lesser extents with programs (66%), departments or centers (71%), the School of Medicine (32%) and the University (49%). Students (26%) express interest in the Ombuds office that was announced in late 2021. Some students wrote that the medical school could do a better job in embracing diversity and inclusion and in mentor training, and many stated that town hall meetings do not serve them well. Coping mechanisms shared by some students demonstrate impressive resilience. These results present a mixed picture. While aspects of biomedical PhD training have begun to recover as the pandemic continues, long-term consequences of the disruption raise challenges that must be addressed by efforts to restore and improve the learning environment required for 21st century research education.

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.

The ability to address the lack of diversity in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math workforce depends on inclusive and equitable training of doctoral students to succeed in the profession. An important metric used to assess equitable training in bioscience doctoral programs is the number of publications that result from a students research. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there are demographic differences in publication rates among all students in a cohort of bioscience Ph.D. programs at the University of California Los Angeles who graduated between 2011 and 2019. Using institutional data and publication database queries, we determined the number of doctoral publications parsed by authorship position, and the timing of the first publication for each student. The resulting dataset was then analyzed for the relationships between publication categories and student gender, race/ethnicity, and citizenship status. We find that female students published significantly fewer total and co-author papers compared to male students, but had the same number of first-author publications. In contrast, students from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups had fewer first-author papers compared to students from well-represented groups, but similar numbers of total and co-author publications. Publication of the first doctoral paper occurred later for female versus male, and underrepresented versus well-represented students. These results provide evidence for distinct patterns of doctoral publication disparities by gender and race/ethnicity, offering insights into a key metric of bioscience student success and informing potential strategies to achieve equitable outcomes in bioscience doctoral education.

Intensive postgraduate courses provide an opportunity for junior and senior level scientists to learn concepts and techniques that will advance their training and research programs. It is commonly assumed that short intensive courses have positive impacts within fields of research; however, these assumptions are rarely tested. Here we describe the framework of a long running postgraduate summer course at Cold Spring Harbor and attempt to quantify the impact made over its history. For over three decades, the Drosophila Neurobiology: Genes, Circuits & Behavior Summer Course at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories (CSHL) has provided participants with intense instruction on a wide variety of topics and techniques in integrative neuroscience using Drosophila as a model organism. Students are introduced to the latest approaches for studying nervous system development, activity and connectivity, as well as complex behaviors and diseases. The course has a long history of successful alumni, many of whom describe participation in the course as foundational to their training. Student surveys of recent participants indicate a high level of satisfaction, improved career outcomes, and direct impact on publications. Analysis of student success reveals that over 64% of participants obtain independent faculty positions. Further, we describe ongoing efforts to enhance diversity and encourage access to scientific research at undergraduate-focused institutions. Together, our findings suggest that laboratory-intensive postgraduate courses provide a highly effective mechanism for scientific training that has lasting positive impacts on trainees.

Historically women have been underrepresented in STEM careers. While the number of women receiving doctorate degrees in the biological sciences has exceeded the number of men since approximately 2005, there is still a disparity between the sexes at more advanced career stages. Achieving equity is an important social goal and there is an expected benefit to science since diverse groups outperform homogeneous groups. There are many factors that contribute to the disparity between men and women in science, including a disparity in research productivity. While many studies have documented this "productivity paradox" and examined factors driving this disparity, few studies have addressed differences in productivity between men and women doctoral students. This is an important population to assess since the individuals are in the formative stages of their academic career and differences in productivity could have a significant impact on career progression. This study addresses this question and identified more than 42,000 doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences working with over 16,000 advisors at 235 institutions in the United States and finds a disparity in research productivity between men and women. Men produce >10% more first author papers, >15% more total papers and their first author papers receive >17% more citations. The findings establish the generality of the gender gap in research productivity among doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences. Redressing this gap at the formative stage of young scientists careers, when they are establishing their credentials to advance in their field, is important to address the disparity between the sexes in the biomedical workforce.

Mentorship is vital for early career researchers in training positions, allowing them to navigate the challenges of work and life in research environments. However, the quality of mentorship received by trainees can vary by investigator and by institution. One challenge faced by those hoping to improve trainee mentorship is that the extent to which mentorship is offered to and experienced by research trainees is not well characterized. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a survey to examine the quality of mentorship received by trainees in research environments, to identify characteristics of positive and negative mentorship, and to highlight best practices to improve trainee mentorship. We received 2,114 responses from researchers at graduate and postdoctoral career stages worldwide. Quantitative analysis showed that at least [~]25-45% of respondents were dissatisfied with some aspects of their mentorship. Qualitative responses revealed that common issues in mentorship include unclear expectations in research and mentoring interactions, lack of guidance, and inadequate support of trainee independence and career goals. Our findings also identified key mentorship elements desired by trainee mentees. Based on trainee suggestions, we describe strategies for individual mentors, departments, and institutions to improve the training experience for graduate and postdoctoral researchers.

Postdoctoral training enables research independence and professional readiness. National reports have emphasized professional development as a critical component of this training period. In response, many institutions are establishing transferable skills training workshops for postdocs; however, the lack of structured programs and an absence of methods to assess outcomes beyond participant satisfaction surveys are critical gaps in postdoctoral training. To address these shortcomings, we took the approach of structured programming and developed a method for controlled assessment of outcomes. Our program You3 (You, Your Team, Your Project), co-designed by postdoctoral fellows, focused on a structured array of management and leadership skills agnostic of ultimate career path(s). We then measured outcomes in a controlled manner, by systematically comparing perceived knowledge and growth of participants with non-participants as the control group. You3 participants discern greater growth, independent of number of years in training, in competencies overall compared to the control group. This growth was shown by multiple criteria including self-reporting and associative analysis. Correspondingly, You3 participants reported greater knowledge in 75% of the modules when compared to controls. These data indicate that structured learning, where postdocs commit to a curriculum via a cohort-structure, leads to positive outcomes and provides a framework for programs to assess outcomes in a rigorous manner.

PurposeAmbient light exposure is linked to myopia development in children and affects myopia susceptibility in animal models. Currently, it is unclear which signals mediate the effects of light on myopia. All-trans retinoic acid (atRA) and dopamine (DA) oppositely influence experimental myopia and may be involved in the retino-scleral signaling cascade underlying myopic eye growth. However, how ocular atRA responds to different lighting and whether atRA and DA interact remains unknown. MethodsDark-adapted C57BL/6J mice (29-31 days old) were exposed to Dim (1 lux), Mid (59 lux), or Bright (12,000 lux) ambient lighting for 5-60 minutes. Some mice were also systemically administered the DA precursor, LDOPA, or atRA prior to light exposure. After exposure, the retina and the back-of-the-eye (BOE) were collected and analyzed for levels of atRA, DA, and the DA metabolite, DOPAC. ResultsDA turnover (DOPAC/DA ratio) in the retina increased in magnitude after only five minutes of exposure to higher ambient luminance but was minimal in the BOE. In contrast, atRA levels in the retina and BOE significantly decreased with higher ambient luminance and longer duration exposure. Intriguingly, LDOPA-treated mice had a transient reduction in retinal atRA compared to saline-treated mice, whereas atRA treatment had no effect on ocular DA. ConclusionsOcular atRA was affected by the duration of exposure to different ambient lighting and retinal atRA levels decreased with increased DA. Overall, these data suggest specific interactions between ambient lighting, atRA, and DA that could have implications for the retino-scleral signaling cascade underlying myopic eye growth.

The recently founded Max Planck PostdocNet brings together postdoctoral researchers (or postdocs) from the Max Planck Society (MPS), provides representation for the postdoctoral community across all Max Planck Institutes (MPI) and associated institutes, and advocates for their interests on their behalf. At the 2019 founding meeting, MPS postdocs quickly raised their concerns about their employment situation and their associated social and working conditions. Subsequently, the PostdocNet conducted the first survey targeting exclusively postdoctoral researchers to gather information on their demographics, employment situations and social conditions. This report presents the results of this survey, providing a thorough characterization of the postdoc demographics as well as the working conditions experienced by the postdoctoral community of the MPS. Remarkably, the survey analysis revealed a number of disparities in the access to employment type, wage level and social benefits. These results will guide future and present MPS postdoctoral researchers and their employers at the MPS to thrive for equality and fairness. Moreover, these results should be of help to the MPS to establish, improve and maintain optimal working conditions for MPS postdocs.

Biochemistry and molecular biology have become increasingly reliant on experimental experience, because they are difficult subjects to understand from a theoretical approach. The Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program was established by the China Ministry of Education to foster the scientific interests and experiences of undergraduate students. Here, we reported on an innovative project-oriented learning (POL) system directed by Taishan Medical University (Named Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Academy of Sciences since February 2019) China, which fused innovative project with biochemical course concepts. This study takes reverse genetics, which is considered to be difficult to understand through course-only learning, as an example. To help undergraduate students understand the principle of reverse genetics, the project involved producing hepatitis C virus in vitro. Furthermore, to give them a comprehensive scientific experience based on their knowledge from textbook, extensive mentorship was provided through the project, including theoretical guidance and technical support for experiments. Assessment showed a comprehensive improvement after participating in these programs. In conclusion, this POL system was a good model that enabled undergraduates to learn more during courses. It also provided a chance to experience hands-on sciences, which might motivate them to pursue a career in science.View Full Text