Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37943810›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

An international consensus on effective, inclusive, and career-spanning short-format training in the life sciences and beyond.

Jason J Williams, Rochelle E Tractenberg, Bérénice Batut, Erin A Becker, Anne M Brown, Melissa L Burke, Ben Busby, Nisha K Cooch, Allissa A Dillman, Samuel S Donovan and 19 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors.

Jason J WilliamsDNA Learning Center, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3049-2010
Rochelle E TractenbergCollaborative for Research on Outcomes and Metrics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1121-2119
Bérénice BatutAlbert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Erin A BeckerThe Carpentries.
Anne M BrownVirginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6951-8228
Melissa L BurkeAustralian BioCommons, North Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5571-8664
Ben BusbyDNAnexus, Mountain View, California, United States of America.
Nisha K CoochCureComms Advisors, LLC.ORCID 0009-0000-0628-0814
Allissa A DillmanBioData Sage.
Samuel S DonovanBioQUEST Curriculum Consortium.
Maria A DoyleBioconductor.
Celia W G van GelderDutch Techcentre for Life Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Christina R HallAustralian BioCommons, North Melbourne, Australia.
Kate L HertweckChan Zuckerberg Initiative, Redwood City, California, United States of America.
Kari L JordanThe Carpentries.ORCID 0000-0003-4121-2432
John R JungckUniversity of Delaware, Newark, DE, United States of America.
Ainsley R LatourIDEA-STEM.
Jessica M LindvallELIXIR-SE/NBIS.ORCID 0000-0002-5042-8481
Marta Lloret-LlinaresEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8205-9799
Gary S McDowellLightoller LLC.ORCID 0000-0002-9470-3799
Rana MorrisNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Teresa MouradEcological Society of America, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Amy NisselleMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8908-5906
Patricia OrdóñezUniversity of Maryland Baltimore County, Catonsville, Maryland, United States of America.
Lisanna PaladinEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Structural and Computational Biology Unit, Heidelberg, Germany.
Patricia M PalagiSwiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Mahadeo A SukhaiCanadian National Institute for the Blind, Toronto, Canada.
Tracy K TealPosit, PBC, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Louise WoodleyCenter for Scientific Collaboration and Community Engagement, Oakland, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) fields change rapidly and are increasingly interdisciplinary. Commonly, STEMM practitioners use short-format training (SFT) such as workshops and short courses for upskilling and reskilling, but unaddressed challenges limit SFT's effectiveness and inclusiveness. Education researchers, students in SFT courses, and organizations have called for research and strategies that can strengthen SFT in terms of effectiveness, inclusiveness, and accessibility across multiple dimensions. This paper describes the project that resulted in a consensus set of 14 actionable recommendations to systematically strengthen SFT. A diverse international group of 30 experts in education, accessibility, and life sciences came together from 10 countries to develop recommendations that can help strengthen SFT globally. Participants, including representation from some of the largest life science training programs globally, assembled findings in the educational sciences and encompassed the experiences of several of the largest life science SFT programs. The 14 recommendations were derived through a Delphi method, where consensus was achieved in real time as the group completed a series of meetings and tasks designed to elicit specific recommendations. Recommendations cover the breadth of SFT contexts and stakeholder groups and include actions for instructors (e.g., make equity and inclusion an ethical obligation), programs (e.g., centralize infrastructure for assessment and evaluation), as well as organizations and funders (e.g., professionalize training SFT instructors; deploy SFT to counter inequity). Recommendations are aligned with a purpose-built framework-"The Bicycle Principles"-that prioritizes evidenced-based teaching, inclusiveness, and equity, as well as the ability to scale, share, and sustain SFT. We also describe how the Bicycle Principles and recommendations are consistent with educational change theories and can overcome systemic barriers to delivering consistently effective, inclusive, and career-spanning SFT.

Indexed as

StudentsTechnologyEngineeringHumans

Identifiers

PMID37943810
PMCPMC10635508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.