Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40201644›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025

Asking Different Questions: Development and implementation of Clinical and Translational Science Award diversity, equity, and inclusion and community engagement training course for TL1 scholars.

Carolina Novella, Desiree M Sigala, Rachel L Reeves, Daniel J Moglen, Frederick J Meyers, Sarah Rebolloso McCullough, Valentina Medici

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. 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

7 authors.

Carolina NovellaFeminist Research Institute, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Desiree M SigalaClinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC), University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Rachel L ReevesClinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC), University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Daniel J MoglenClinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC), University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Frederick J MeyersUC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Sarah Rebolloso McCulloughFeminist Research Institute, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Valentina MediciClinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC), University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5438-284X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In recent years, there has been a growth in awareness of the importance of equity and community engagement in clinical and translational research. One key limitation of most training programs is that they focus on change at the individual level. While this is important, such an approach is not sufficient to address systemic inequities built into the norms of clinical and translational research. Therefore, it is necessary to provide training that addresses changing scientific norms and culture to ensure inclusivity and health equity in translational research. Method: We developed, implemented, and assessed a training course that addressed how research norms are based on histories and legacies of white supremacy, colonialism, and patriarchy, ultimately leading to unintentional exclusionary and biased practices in research. Additionally, the course provides resources for trainees to build skills in how to redress this issue and improve the quality and impact of clinical and translational research. In 2022 and 2023, the course was offered to cohorts of pre and postdoctoral scholars in clinical and translational research at a premier health research Institution. Results: The efficacy and immediate impact of three training modules, based on community engagement, racial diversity in clinical trials, and cancer clusters, were evaluated with data from both participant feedback and assessment from the authors. TL1 scholars indicated increased new knowledge in the field and described potential future actions to integrate community voices in their own research program. Conclusions: Results indicate that trainings offered new perspectives and knowledge to the scholars.

Indexed as

Clinical and Translational Research TrainingClinical and Translational Science AwardCommunity engagementcurriculumdiversityequityhealth disparitiesinclusionsocial determinants of healthTL1

Identifiers

PMID40201644
PMCPMC11975778

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.