ArticleJournal of healthcare leadership2025
Institutional Supports for Early Career Researchers During Crises: COVID-19 Pandemic Case Study.
Article in Journal of healthcare leadership, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.