ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Exploring grant writing coaching and its role in professional development of health equity investigators: A qualitative study.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing the science and practice of effective mentorship.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: External funding is a critical metric in research career advancement, particularly in biomedical fields. Grant-writing coaching emerges as a strategy in biomedical workforce development. Recognizing disparities in grant success among early-career investigators from underrepresented groups, the National Research Mentoring Network Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) provides grant-writing coaching to support these scholars. This study explores the roles of NRMN-SETH grant-writing coaches in fostering technical skills and social support in a group setting. Methods: This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with 16 NIH-funded investigators who served as coaches within the NRMN-SETH program. Data were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using the Framework Method, identifying key roles related to coaching practices. Results: Findings reveal that grant-writing coaching involved personalized guidance, confidence-building, and structured group interactions. Coaches emphasized individualized feedback on grant components and provided iterative guidance. The group-based coaching environment fostered peer support and normalized challenges, creating a collaborative atmosphere conducive to skill-building. Coaches noted the importance of institutional support in enabling participants to engage in the program, though challenges arose in managing participants with varying grant-writing experience. Conclusions: This study highlights the potential of grant-writing coaching to enhance research capacity among underrepresented scholars, offering a structured, supportive approach that complements traditional mentorship. Integrating tailored coaching programs within biomedical workforce development, particularly at minority-serving and low-resourced institutions, may reduce disparities in grant success. Future research could expand on these findings by investigating the long-term career impacts of coaching and testing the effectiveness of peer-led, group-based components in grant-writing success.
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.