Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42207841›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2026

Career Pathways and Skill Preparedness among Biology PhDs: A Social Cognitive Career Theory Perspective.

Lechen Li, Jue Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lechen LiSchool of Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education, College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.
Jue WuSchool of Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education, College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the significant shift in the career landscape for biology doctorates-a decline in academic positions and robust growth in industry employment-postdoctoral training remains the most common immediate next step. Guided by Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), this study examines (1) the self-efficacy, contextual factors, and outcome expectations that shape biology PhD graduates' early career decisions, and (2) the perceived strengths and gaps in doctoral training identified after entering the job market. Drawing on semistructured interviews with 57 biology PhD graduates from the early career research (ECR) project, we found that graduates who pursued postdocs described strong self-efficacy in research and mentoring, whereas those in non-postdoc roles emphasized confidence in transferable skills. Principal investigators (PIs) were generally supportive yet often lacked the resources or networks to guide nonacademic transitions. Career decisions were also shaped by outcome expectations, with both extrinsic factors and intrinsic motivations influencing career choices. Additionally, regardless of career decisions, nearly all participants reported that their programs effectively developed core scientific and research skills but left critical gaps in business and management skills, advanced statistics and programming, and structured career development. These findings suggest areas in which biology doctoral programs may more intentionally support diverse career pathways, including expanded career development support, interdisciplinary skill-building, and strengthened faculty mentorship for diverse careers.

Indexed as

BiologyCareer ChoiceEducation, Biological and Biomedical Sciences, GraduateEducation, GraduateSocial CognitionFemaleHumansMalePostdoctoral TrainingSelf Efficacy

Identifiers

PMID42207841
PMCPMC13229117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.