Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The National Conference on Health Disparities Student Research Forum

The National Conference on Health Disparities Student Research Forum The annual National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) was launched in 2000. It unites health professionals, research- ers, community leaders, and government officials, and is a catalyzing force in developing policies, research interventions, and programs that address prevention, social determinants, health disparities, and health equity. The NCHD Student Research Forum (SRF) was established in 2011 at the Medical University of South Carolina to build high-quality biomedical research presentation capacity in primarily underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional students. This paper describes the unique research training and professional development aspects of the NCHD SRF. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and professional development workshops on finding a mentor and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with mentors. Between 2011 and 2018, 400 undergraduate and graduate/professional students participated in the NCHD SRF. Most students were women (80.5%). Approximately half were African American or black (52.3%), 18.0% were white, and 21.3% were of Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. The NCHD SRF is unique in several ways. First, it provides detailed instructions on developing a scientific abstract, including content area examples. Second, it establishes a mandatory pre-conference training webinar demonstrating how to prepare a scientific poster. Third, it works with the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans to help identify potential sources of travel funding for students with accepted abstracts. These features make the NCHD SRF different from many other conferences focused on students’ scientific presentations. Keywords United States · Health disparities · Underrepresented students · Conference · Professional development Introduction However, young adults are not entering biomedical science careers (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, Statement of the Problem and specifically physical, health, and life sciences [STEM]) at commensurate rates as previous generations, especially The Shortage of Diverse Biomedical Scientists in South those who are racially and ethnically diverse, from rural Carolina and the United States areas, and from low socioeconomic-position backgrounds [3] Since 2000, the percentage of underrepresented minori- The Millennial Generation, comprising 26% of the popu- ties receiving degrees in engineering and the physical sci- lation, is the most diverse in United States (US) history. ences has been flat [ 3]. According to a 2018 PEW Research Center report, African American and Hispanic workers con- tinue to be underrepresented in the STEM workforce. Afri- * Marvella E. Ford can Americans comprise 11% of the US workforce overall, fordmar@musc.edu but represent only 9% of STEM workers, while Hispanics Extended author information available on the last page of the article Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 86 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 comprise 16% of the US workforce but represent only 7% patient-provider communication, and better educational of all STEM workers [7]. However, within job clusters, the experiences for biomedical students during their training [1, representation of African Americans and Hispanics varies 2, 9]. Increasing the number of diverse investigators who are widely. To cite an example, 37% of licensed practical and well-trained in rigorous methodological and analytical prin- vocational nurses are either African American or Hispanic. ciples of research is a critical step toward increasing capacity In contrast, healthcare jobs requiring higher levels of edu- in health equity research and toward decreasing disparities cation and with higher pay scales have smaller percentages in health outcomes. of workers who are African American or Hispanic, including physicians and surgeons (11%), pharmacists (10%), dentists Rationale for the National Conference on Health Disparities (9%), and physical therapists (9%). Only 5% of optometrists, Student Research Forum veterinarians, and chiropractors are African American or Hispanic [7]. At the same time, the prevalence of chronic The central purpose of the National Conference on Health diseases (including cancer, diabetes, stroke, heart disease, Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF) is to obesity, and oral diseases) in the US is rapidly increasing, build capacity in biomedical sciences research in primarily to the extent that nearly half (45% of the 329,987,196 people underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional in the US) suffer from at least one of these diseases [11]. students. To address the shortage of racially/ethnically Chronic diseases, by definition, last for more than 1 year diverse biomedical professionals in the US workforce, Con- and are often accompanied by minor to significant functional gressman Jim Clyburn and former Congresswoman Donna limitations [4, 5]. Therefore, the demand for chronic dis- Christensen, who co-lead the annual NCHD, decided to ease prevention, screening, and treatment services will grow include a SRF as part of the NCHD. A critical component commensurately over the next two decades as the proportion of the NCHD is the SRF, which was developed in 2011 at of older adults in the US increases. It is imperative that we the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) to build equip larger numbers of diverse, post-Millennial Generation high-quality research presentation capacity in underrepre- students with the skill sets, and cultivate in them the moti- sented undergraduate and graduate/professional students vation, required to attain and excel in biomedical careers as across the US. part of a solution to the problem of insufficient healthcare workers to care for an aging America. To improve health outcomes, investigators must under- Methods stand the science behind the disease. Chronic disease is a multi-step disease process resulting from a series of bio- To maximize the benefits of the 1-day annual NCHD SRF, a logic, social, and environmental changes that abrogate strategic approach to training and mentoring undergraduate normal cellular growth controls [6]. Advances in chronic and graduate/professional students in the art of scientific disease research will require well-trained, interactive, and presentations is included. The methods used in developing productive scientists with the ability to understand and and implementing the SRF are described below. manipulate molecular, cellular, and genetic events within a physiological context, as well as social and environmental Call for Abstracts contexts. A landmark review by Ginther et al. [8] noted that African Americans are 10% less likely than whites to receive The NCHD SRF Planning Committee issues a national National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Project Grant Call for Abstracts four months prior to the due date of the (R01) funding, a marker of independent investigator status, abstracts. In keeping with the theme of training the next gen- even after controlling for demographic characteristics, edu- eration of health disparities researchers and policy makers, cation and training, and research productivity among other the Call for Abstracts includes the statement that the mission measures. of the NCHD is to focus on policies, research interventions, Given the potential for dramatic workforce shortages due and programs that address prevention, social determinants, to the reasons mentioned above, particularly among under- and personal responsibility in reducing health disparities represented populations, it is imperative to devise strate- and promoting health equity. Abstracts from the following gies and execute well-planned training programs designed categories are invited for submission: (a) basic sciences, (b) to enhance the scope and diversity of the next generation clinical sciences, (c) population sciences/behavioral sci- of chronic disease researchers and clinician scientists. As ences/social sciences, and (d) environmental sciences. The noted by the Institute of Medicine [10], greater diversity Call for Abstracts also notes that required national poster and among medical researchers and clinicians leads to improved oral presentation training webinars will take place prior to access to care among racially and ethnically diverse popu- the NCHD SRF for students whose abstracts were accepted, lations, greater patient choice and satisfaction, improved to enhance the students’ presentation skills. 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 87 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place ranked poster presentations in the Abstract Submission Guidelines undergraduate and graduate/professional student categories, respectively ($500, $300, and $200). Furthermore, the two The guidelines for abstract submissions are posted on the NCHD website. The guidelines document explicitly states oral presenters each receive a cash award of $100 as well as a scholarship to cover the costs of their airfare and hotel that all abstracts must include the following information: (1) hypothesis or statement about the problem being inves- charges. The funds for the airfare, hotel costs, poster pres- entation cash prizes, and the oral presentation cash awards tigated and why the research is important, (2) methods, (3) results and discussion of findings, (4) conclusions and future are awarded by the NCHD. The Wufoo online form builder platform is used for the research directions, and (5) acknowledgement of funder(s). The guidelines for abstract submissions document also abstract submission process. This platform allows for the collection of supplemental data related to the abstract sub- includes information to assist the students as they prepare their abstracts. This information is more explicit than the mission, such as the student’s contact information (name, mailing address, email address, telephone number); gender; information that would typically be included in a call for abstracts to serve as a learning tool for the students: (1) Only undergraduate or graduate/professional student status; col- lege or university; name and email address of the student’s one poster abstract can be submitted per student as primary author. However, a student may be listed as a co‐author on dean, research mentor, faculty advisor, and department chair; category of research (i.e., clinical sciences); abstract title and a second abstract. (2) Students working in the same labora- tory must independently submit original abstracts. Identi- authors; the actual abstract; whether a student was applying for a travel scholarship; and the level of travel scholarship cal abstracts submitted by different students will be auto- matically rejected. (3) Approval must be obtained from for which the student is applying (hotel costs only). The stu- dents are responsible for paying the conference registration all co‐authors listed on the abstract; failure to do so will result in the immediate rejection of the abstract. (4) Stu- fees, which include breakfast, lunch, and evening networking receptions. dents must obtain approval from their faculty advisor(s)/ research mentor(s) before submitting the abstract; failure to do so will result in the immediate rejection of the abstract. (5) Abstracts must be written by the student and reviewed Responding to Students’ Questions During the Abstract Submission Process by their faculty advisor or research mentor. (6) Abstracts must adhere to the highest quality standards—with correct During the abstract submission process, students send the grammar, spelling, and sentence structure (i.e., with editing and proofreading prior to submission). (7) Data tables and NCHD SRF organizers several different questions. Examples of the questions and responses are listed below. figures are not to be included with the abstract. (8) Abstracts are limited to a maximum of 300 words. Question: Am I allowed to present a poster on work that The guidelines for abstract submissions document also include links to the following helpful guides on developing I completed during a recent undergraduate internship if I am now in graduate/professional school? Response: Yes. an abstract: Your abstract will still be judged in the graduate/profes- • sional student category. http:// writi ngcen ter. unc. edu/ hando uts/ abstr acts/ • http:// rc. rcjou rnal. com/ conte nt/ 49/ 10/ 1206. full. pdf Question: May I see my abstract review comments? • Response: Yes, we will send the comments to you. http://www .c hemis tryvie ws.or g/de tails/ educa tion/ 27095 21/ T ips_ for_ Wr iti ng_ Be tter_ Scien ce_ P apers_ A bs tr Question: Several of my classmates and I worked on the same project. Can we each submit an abstract about the act_3. html project? Response: Yes, as long as each abstract focuses on a different analytic outcome related to the project. Incentivizing Students from Academic Institutions Across the US to Submit Abstracts Question: I work in a research team. Other students on my team submitted abstracts that were accepted but mine To further incentivize the students to submit their abstracts was not. Could you please explain this? Response: Each abstract is reviewed independently by a set of scientific for the NCHD SRF, the Call for Abstracts also notes that tiered scholarships to support hotel costs will be available reviewers based on the listed review criteria. Question: Could I choose to give an oral vs poster presen- on a limited basis for students with the highest-ranked abstracts, based on the abstract review scores. The students tation? Response: The abstracts with the highest scores in the undergraduate and the graduate/professional student may apply for the competitive scholarships for hotel support when they submit their abstracts. The Call for Abstracts also category will be selected for oral presentation in addition to poster presentation. includes a statement that cash prizes will be awarded to the 1 3 88 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 proper labeling of figures and graphs in the poster presenta- Abstract Review Process tion, and using a software program to develop the presenta- tion. Additionally, the dimensions of the poster boards that Abstracts are evaluated by faculty from across the US who serve on the NCHD SRF Planning Committee and/ will be used are sent to the students along with the required poster dimensions, which are dependent on the size of the or the Abstract Review Sub-Committee. Reviewers are assigned abstracts to review in either the undergraduate or poster boards that are rented at the conference location each year. the graduate/professional student categories, resulting in a separate set of reviewers for each category. Each abstract NCHD SRF Agenda is assigned to two reviewers who independently evalu- ate the abstract using the following five criteria, each of The NCHD SRF takes place from 7:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. on which has a maximum value of 20 points, for a total of 100 possible points: (1) originality and innovation, (2) a Wednesday in late June, and the day prior to the NCHD conference which occurs from Thursday to Saturday. The scientific content supported by quantitative information, (3) merit of the research, (4) quality of the written con- NCHD SRF agenda includes: (1) a welcome and overview; (2) oral presentations by the undergraduate and gradu- tent, and (5) relevance and adherence to guidelines and format. Abstracts ranked with a score that is equivalent ate/professional students, respectively, with the highest abstract scores; (3) poster presentations judged by faculty to or exceeds the mean score for the undergraduate or the graduate/professional student categories, respectively, from across the US during the conference; (4) a keynote speaker presentation during lunch, followed by a breakout are accepted for presentation. Abstract acceptance/non- acceptance notifications as well as selection for the travel for undergraduate and graduate/professional students; (5) roundtable discussions held for graduate/professional stu- awards are sent to the students after the abstract reviews have been completed. The notifications are sent at least dents in the areas of mentoring/networking, professional eth- ics, and identifying research opportunities; (6) roundtable 2 months prior to the conference to allow the students time to prepare their poster and/or oral presentations, discussions held for undergraduate students about applying to graduate or professional school; (7) a workshop held for and to identify alternative and/or supplemental sources of travel funds. undergraduate students on preparing abstracts for future scientific meetings; and (8) a presentation of an interactive Additionally, unlike most other student conferences, a Financial Assistance Sub-Committee of the SRF, with learning module by a National Library of Medicine staff member. the student’s permission, contacts the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans of each stu- Poster Review Criteria dent whose abstract was accepted, to inform them that the student’s abstract was accepted and to work with them to The NCHD SRF includes three main categories by which identify potential sources of funding to support the student’s participation in the NCHD SRF. The Financial Assistance the posters are evaluated, as well an overall review category. The four review categories are: research content (42 points Sub-Committee members first contacts each student’s research mentor and faculty advisor. If those contacts do not maximum), presentation delivery (30 points maximum), poster quality (24 points maximum), and overall presenta- lead to the successful identification of funding sources, then the sub-committee members contact the student’s depart- tion quality (6 points maximum). Therefore, the maximum score for each poster is 102 points. ment chair and/or dean. The research content category includes seven compo- nents: (1) the research has merit and makes a contribution National Webinar Training in Poster and Oral Presentations to the field of study, (2) the abstract accurately summa- rizes the research presented, (3) the introduction provides To assist the students whose abstracts were accepted with brief yet pertinent information about the project, (4) the methodology is appropriate for the research presented, preparing their posters and oral presentations, the NCHD SRF conducts a national training webinar which was initi- (5) appropriate methods of analysis for interpretation are utilized, (6) the results are detailed and explained accu- ated in 2014 to improve the quality of the scientific research that is presented. The webinar includes key points related to rately, and (7) the presentation provides implications for future research and/or practical application. A maximum developing an effective poster presentation, including the appropriate design and layout, the order of the information score of 6 points is possible for each component for which the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above that is presented (e.g., Introduction, Purpose, Sample, Meth- ods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, and References), the Average). identification of the audience for the poster presentation, the 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 89 The presentation delivery category includes five com- Results ponents: (1) the presenter responded f luently to questions regarding their work, (2) the presenter was enthusiastic Between 2011 and 2018, a total of 407 undergraduate about the research and utilizes both the poster and per- and graduate/professional students participated in the sonal knowledge of the subject to present the research, (3) NCHD SRF or 58 students per year on average, as shown the presenter had a strong understanding of the informa- in Table 1. Most participants were female (80.8%). With tion and the topic, (4) the presenter was an active partici- regard to race and ethnicity, approximately half of the pant in presenting the research (interested in questions, NCHD SRF students were African American or black outgoing, knowledgeable about the research topic), and (52.1%), 17.9% were white, 21.6% were of Hispanic/ (5) the presenter’s mannerisms (eye contact and gestures) Latinx ethnicity, and the remainder (8.4%) were of Asian contributed to the explanation of the research. A maxi- or other racial/ethnic groups including American Indian or mum score of 6 points is possible for each component for Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, which the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 and unknown race. Table 1 describes the gender charac- (Above Average). teristics of all of the student participants. However, due The poster quality category includes four components to the small number of American Indian/Alaska Native, with a maximum score of 6 points each: (1) the poster con- Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Asian stu- tent was grammatically correct, (2) the presenter used the dent participants, Table 1 only describes the racial/ethnic available poster space effectively, (3) all required elements characteristics for African American or black, white, and (abstract, introduction, procedures, discussion, etc.) were Hispanic/Latinx student participants. apparent and easy to follow, and (4) all figures, charts, Figure 1 shows that the NCHD SRF participants rep- images, and graphs were properly presented and contained resent the East Coast, West Coast, Southeast, and Mid- information relevant to the central topic. A maximum west regions of the US, as well as international locations. score of 6 points is possible for each component for which The Supplemental Table (Online Resource 1) displays the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above the specific location of each NCHD and the academic Average). The final category by which the posters were institutions of SRF participants by year. In addition, the judged is an overall category. It provides a scale ranging categories of presented abstracts and poster winners of from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above Average) and the NCHD SRF for 2011–2018 are displayed by year in reflects the judges’ overall evaluative review of the poster. Table 2. Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF) participants by year and location 2011 2012 Little 2013 St. 2014 Long 2016 Wash- 2017 New 2018 Phila- p-value Total, n = 407 Charleston, Rock, AR, Thomas, Beach, CA, ington, DC, Orleans, LA, delphia, PA, (%) SC, n = 57 n = 64 (%) US Virgin n = 64 (%) n = 61 (%) n = 36 (%) n = 38 (%) (%) Islands, n = 87 (%) Gender   Male 12 (21.1) 13 (20.3) 12 (13.8) 9 (14.1) 13 (21.3) 7 (19.4) 12 (31.6) 0.29 78 (19.2)   Female 45 (78.9) 51 (79.7) 75 (86.2) 55 (85.9) 48 (78.7) 29 (80.6) 26 (72.2) 329 (80.8) Race/Ethnicity   African 39 (68.4) 35 (61.4) 63 (77.8) 15 (24.6) 28 (50.9) 10 (35.7) 22 (64.7) 0.00 212 (56.8) Ameri- can or Black   White 7 (12.3) 8 (14.0) 6 (7.4) 11 (18.0) 18 (32.7) 12 (42.9) 11 (32.4) 73 (19.6)   Hispanic/ 11 (19.3) 14 (24.6) 12 (14.8) 35 (54.7) 9 (16.4) 6 (21.4) 1 (2.9) 88 (23.6) Latinx Abbreviations: SC South Carolina, AR Arkansas, US United States, CA California, DC District of Columbia, LA Louisiana, PA Pennsylvania, SD standard deviation The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 Participants of Asian (n = 27) and other racial/ethnic groups (n = 7; includes American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and unknown race) are not shown 1 3 90 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Fig. 1 National and interna- tional locations of academic institutions of students participating in the National Conference on Health Dispari- ties (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF), 2011-2018. Note: The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 such as Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Discussion Colorado, Utah, and Arizona. Some of these states have large Native American and Hispanic/Latinx populations, Since 2011, the NCHD SRF Planning Committee has led and research in these groups would be ideally suited for the coordination of the annual SRF of the NCHD. The all- presentation during the NCHD SRF. day NCHD  SRF for undergraduate and graduate/profes- Given the increasing interest and success of the sional students includes a poster session, oral presentations, program, the NCHD  SRF has since expanded to also a luncheon keynote speaker, and roundtable discussions. The offer mentorship and guidance related to academic and NCHS SRF also includes an interactive learning module professional career development. For example, this has presented by a National Library of Medicine staff member. included roundtable discussions on applying to gradu- The NCHD SRF appears to be reaching its focal group ate/professional school for undergraduate students. of participating students, African Americans and Hispanics/ For graduate/professional students, funding, mentor- Latinx, who are the most underrepresented groups in the ing, and making ethical decisions have been topics of biomedical sciences. These two groups had the highest rep- discussion. Prior to the next NCHD SRF, its leaders resentation among all of the students who participated in the will add a Q&A section to the NCHD SRF website to NCHD SRF to date. address past student’s questions to assist others in the From 2011 to 2016, academic partners in the cities where future as well as continuing to respond individually to the NCHD SRF took place were identified and assisted with each student’s questions. the recruitment of students. However, in 2017 and 2018, While the NCHD SRF has proven to be a successful academic partners were not identified who could serve in research training opportunity for undergraduate and gradu- this capacity. The lack of a local academic partner likely ate/professional students, its scope could be expanded to contributed to the lower numbers of participating students include high school students, who are at earlier stages of in 2017 and 2018 as compared with previous years. In the the research training pipeline. To accomplish this goal, in future, the NCHD SRF Planning Committee could enhance the future, the SRF Planning Committee could reach out their efforts to include academic partners in several states to local high school administrators to invite their students with large numbers of Hispanic/Latinx students, including to participate in the SRF. Arizona, New Mexico, Missouri, and Colorado. The NCHD SRF Planning Committee could also invite The quality of the poster and oral presentations has high school, undergraduate, and graduate/professional stu- improved steadily over the years as a result of the man- dents to join the Committee to provide input on the over- datory pre-conference training webinars. The NCHD all topics as well as the activities that take place during the SRF has included students from many regions of the NCHD SRF. Additionally, the NCHD SRF Planning Commit- US, including the Northwest, Southwest, Northeast, and tee could develop specific training activities related the edu- Southeast. However, in the future, greater efforts could be cation and career development of the high school students. made to advertise the NCHD SRF in Midwestern states 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 91 Table 2 Categories of presented abstracts and poster winners of the National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF), 2011–2018* 2011 (n = 21) 2012 (n = 39) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 4   Basic Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 2   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 3   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 11   Environmental Sciences: 0   Environmental Sciences: 0 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 2   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 10   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 19   Environmental Sciences: 0   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: N/A   1st place: Madhulika Vulimiri, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,   2nd place: N/A Poster Title: Patient and Provider Perspectives of Community-based Diabetes   3rd place: N/A Health Promoter-led Intervention Graduate/professional student poster winners   2nd place: Kai Carey, Philander Smith College, Poster Title: Role of TGM2 and   1st place: N/A CIN85 in the Radiation Resistance of Pancreatic Cancer Cells   2nd place: N/A   3rd place: Lakeisha Watson, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Poster   3rd place: N/A Title: Risk factors and HIV Education in Rural Counties in North Carolina among African Americans Graduate/professional student poster winners   1st place: Brittney Mull, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Discrimination in Health Care Settings: Perspectives of Latino Patients   2nd place: Lizette Alvarez, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Previous Nutrition Education and its Influence on the Outcomes of Nutri- tion Education Programs at Point of Purchase   3rd place: Feana Francis Devaraj, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Poster Title: Naturally Derived Compounds and their Cytotoxicity in Pancreatic Cancer Cell Lines 2013 (n = 32) 2014 (n = 55) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 0   Basic Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 5   Sciences/Social Sciences: 15   Environmental Sciences: 1   Environmental Sciences: 0 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 22   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Environmental Sciences: 0   Sciences/Social Sciences: 34 Undergraduate student poster winners   Environmental Sciences: 2 st   1 place: Kendra Hearn, Spellman College, Poster Title: Lapatinib and Undergraduate student poster winners st Neratinib: Using Combination Drug Therapy to Advance the Effect of the   1 place: Nanci Alanis Alcantara, University of Illinois at Chicago, Poster Treatment of HER2 Positive Breast Title: How do Different Stressors Relate to Body Mass Index Among U.S. and nd   2 place: Nicole Crawford, Georgia Southern University, Poster Title: Inti- Immigrant-born Latinas? nd mate Partner Violence: A Silent Phenomenon   2 place: Joaquin Magana, Occidental College, Poster Title: Developing a rd   3 place: Sarah Wolf, University of the Virgin Islands, Poster Title: Factors qPCR Assay to Quantify Relative Telomere Length; a Tool to Investigate the Contributing to Fecal Indicator Bacteria in Brewer’s Bay, USVI Basic Science of Health Disparities rd Graduate/professional student poster winners   3 place: Marina Armendariz, California State University- Long Beach, Poster st   1 place: Angelika Clarke, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Obesity- related Eating Habits Heighten Risk for Type 2 Diabetes among Title: Risk Factors for Early Pubertal Onset in African American Girls at-risk Latino College Students nd   2 place: Yamisha Rutherford, Morehouse School of Medicine, Poster Title: Graduate/professional student poster winners st Weight Change as a Predictor of Physical Health Among African American   1 place: Tanya Troy, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Poster Title: Breast Cancer Survivors Advance Directives in an Older African American Population: What are the rd   3 place: Eugenia Maravilla, California State University-Long Beach, Poster Attitudes and Barriers to Completion? A Pilot Study nd Title: The Potential Antimicrobial Activity of Locusta Migratoria Apolipo-   2 place: Jasmine Travers, Columbia University School of Nursing, Poster Title: phorin III Does State Legislation Improve Nursing Workforce Diversity? rd   3 place: Lorena Rodriguez, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Does Nutritional Training Increase Knowledge and Self-Efficacy among Promotores de Salud? 1 3 92 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Table 2 (continued) 2016 (n = 61) 2017 (n = 36) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 2   Basic Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 18   Sciences/Social Sciences: 12   Environmental Sciences: 7   Environmental Sciences: 1 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/ Social Sciences: 28   Sciences/Social Sciences: 18   Environmental Sciences: 1   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: Chiamaka Ani, University of Georgia, Poster Title: The Role of   1st place: Abbas Berjaoui, Wayne State University, Poster Title: Health Dispari- Stat6 in Altering the Microbiota During Helminth Infection ties among Arab Americans in Michigan: Results from the 2013 Arab Behavio-   2nd place: Joseph Real, The College of William & Mary, Poster Title: ral Risk Factors Survey Stretched Thin: Social and Environmental Barriers to Diabetes Management   2nd place: Mariam Khan, Santa Clara University, Poster Title: Understanding among Low-Income Patients at a Safety Net Clinic the Effects of Microaggressions and Acculturation Stress on the Mental Health   3rd place: Author Yao, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: of College Students Does “Confidence” Mediate the Relationship between English Proficiency   3rd place: Melody Nasser, California State University- Monterey Bay, Poster and Health Status among Asian Americans? Title: Evaluating Pathways to Homelessness in LGBTQ-Identifying Residents Graduate/professional student poster winners of San Francisco   1st place: Courtney Maclin-Akinyemi, University of Memphis, Poster Title: Graduate/professional student poster winners Profiles of African American Identity, Activity Engagement, SES, and   1st place: Mahalia Sam- Clarke, Claflin University, Poster Title: Directed Evolu- Comorbid Obesity-Hypertension: Implications for Culturally Tailored Inter- tion of Temperature Dependence of Activity in α/β Barrel Enzyme vention Development   2nd place: Janelle K. Dunne-Wylie, George Washington University, Poster Title:   2nd place: Angelina Majeno, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Patient Experiences with Family Planning in FQHCs: Disparities by Race, Title: Differences in Mental Health and Well-Being among Women Living in Ethnicity and Language Long Beach, California   3rd place: Monique McLeary, University of North Carolina- Greensboro, Poster   3rd place: Christina Gladney, University of Florida, Poster Title: The Effects Title: Support of Disordered Eating Behaviors in Online Spaces: A Content of Father Absence on Daughter’s Development Analysis of the ProED Subreddit 2018 (n = 21) Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 3   Environmental Sciences: 1 Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 16   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: David Chime, Allen University, Poster Title: The Effects of Crude Oil Spillage and Eventual Bioaccumulation in Humans   2nd place: Victoria Rai, University of Michigan, Poster Title: Unmet Need for Fetal Assessment amongst High-Risk Pregnancies in a Rural District Hospital   3rd place: Monica Taneja, John Hopkins University, Poster Title: Lifestyle, Ethnicity, and Inflammation Prevalence among Breast Cancer Survivors and Women Without Breast Cancer: A Comparison Using NHANES Graduate/professional student poster winners   1st place: Donica’ Beckett, University of Nevada- Los Vegas, Poster Title: Exploring PrEP Attitudes, Barriers and Facilitators of Use, Sexual Risk Behaviors and Communication Channel Preferences of Self-Reported Hetero- sexual African American/Black Students Enrolled in Jefferson County, Texas Colleges   2nd place: Elizabeth Duxbury, University of California- San Diego, Poster Title: Associations Between Education, Physical and Emotional Health, and Social Support in San Diego   3rd place: Veronica Morawek, The Catholic University of America, Poster Title: Psychosocial Factors Associated with Health Perception in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Alejandra Kaplan, Montclair State University, Poster Title: Exploring Accul- turation as it Relates to Sociodemographic and Behavioral Factors Underlying Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Prevention Behaviors in New Jersey The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 93 the conference website, and inclusion in the Souvenir Con- Impact of the NCHD SRF ference Program, among others. The NCHD SRF has had significant impacts on the career trajectories of many of the student participants. For exam- ple, a previous Hispanic/Latinx NCHD SRF poster pre- senter was a doctoral student at MUSC. The work that she Strengths and Limitations presented at the NCHD SRF was based on a Diversity Sup- plement. She is now an Epidemiologist at a health research While the change in funding support for the NCHD SRF appears to have resulted in a smaller number of students center in Florida. Another NCHD SRF participant presented a poster while who participate each year, it has also resulted in a broader geographic distribution of the academic institutions of the she was a doctoral student at the University of Nevada Las Vegas. She is Native American and is now an Assistant Pro- participating students. A limitation of the NCHD SRF is the higher rate of conference participation among women fessor in a College of Population Health. She recently iden- tified five of her underrepresented Master of Public Health when compared with men. In the future, the NCHD SRF organizers will make an effort to increase the participation of (MPH) students and helped them to submit abstracts of their scientific work to the 2020 NCHD SRF (which was post- men by reaching out to local community groups and student organizations including barbershops, fraternities, social jus- poned due to the COVID-19 pandemic). A previous NCHD SRF participant later became the tice organizations, science clubs, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) groups, student unions, athletic clubs and Director of Health Equity for the Health Commission of a major urban area. Her role in this position is to promote sports leagues, and churches. health equity in the city’s health and health care practices. She stood during an NCHD and publicly stated that her par- ticipation in the NCHD SRF solidified her commitment to a career in health equity and gave her the confidence to pursue Conclusion her current role. The  NCHD SRF differs from many existing national meetings in that it provides distinct value-added activi- Sustainability ties including capacity-building, research training, and presentation experience that are not available in other From 2011 to 2014, the NCHD covered all of the travel costs of the student participants, including air travel, hotel costs, national meetings that are valuable to both undergradu- ate and graduate/professional students alike. Additionally, and meals. After 2014, the full travel scholarships grew too cost-prohibitive for the NCHD. Therefore, starting in 2016, the NCHD SRF focuses on underrepresented groups in STEM, particularly African Americans/blacks and His- the NCHD has supported the hotel costs of 20 students (with two students per hotel room), and supported the full travel panic/Latinx students. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and costs of the two oral presenters (one undergraduate student and one graduate/professional student). The NCHD SRF also methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and pro- fessional development workshops on finding a mentor formed a Financial Assistance Sub-Committee consisting of three individuals who contact the research mentors, faculty and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with advisors, chairs, and deans of the students whose abstracts were accepted to help them to identify potential sources of mentors. In summary, the NCHD SRF presents an ideal opportunity to invest in future leaders through career and funding at each student’s academic institutions, as well as potential funding from other sources such as fraternities and professional development activities, including mentorship. sororities, local businesses, and scientific organizations. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- Funding is needed to sustain the NCHD SRF and attend- tary material available at https://doi. or g/10. 1007/ s13187- 021- 02082-3 . ance at the annual meeting which takes place at a different institution each year. Local and national partners are actively Acknowledgements The NCHD SRF Planning Committee thanks all being identified and welcomed to build relationships with sponsors, staff, faculty, and poster judges, students, for their support. The authors would like to thank the late Mr. Leroy Lewis for his unwa- individuals and organizations committed to improving health vering commitment and dedication to the NCHD SRF. Special thanks and development. go to Dr. David E. Rivers and Dr. Sabra Slaughter for their visionary We accomplish this through various levels of sponsorship leadership and continued support. opportunities ($5,000; $10,000; $25,000+; and $50,000+) and benefits such as complimentary conference registra- Author Contribution All authors contributed to the study conception and design. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. tions and exhibit space, logo placement and URL link on 1 3 94 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Funding This work was supported by US Department of Defense References (DOD) Southeastern Virtual Institute for Health Equity and Well- ness grants W81XWH-11–2-0164 and W81XWH-10–2-0057; US 1. Alexandraki I, Mooradian AD (2013) Redesigning medical educa- DOD grant W81XWH-12–1-0043;National Institutes of Health tion to improve health care delivery and outcomes. Health Care (NIH) grants P20CA157071, R01MD005892, U54CA210962, Manag (Frederick) 32(1):37–42. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1097/ HCM. UL1TR001450, and P30CA138313; National Institute on Minor- 0b013 e3182 7ed8fa ity Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) grant U54MD000214; 2. Ashton CM, Haidet P, Paterniti DA, Collins TC, Gordon HS, National Institute on Aging (NIA) grant  K02AG059140; NIH/ O’Malley K, Petersen LA et al (2003) Racial and ethnic dispari- National Cancer Institute (NCI) grants  R25 CA193088—South ties in the use of health services: bias, preferences, or poor com- Carolina Cancer Health Equity Consortium (SC CHEC): Summer munication? J Gen Intern Med 18(2):146–152 Undergraduate Research Training Program and; P30CA138313- 3. Baine C (2000) Women and minorities in STEM careers: advanc- 10S2—Cancer Center Support Grant Administrative Supplement to ing our world. STEM Strengthen NCI Supported Community Outreach Capacity through 4. Basu J, Avila R, Ricciardi R (2016) Hospital readmission rates Community Health Educators (CHEs) of the National Outreach in U.S. states: are readmissions higher where more patients with Network (NON)). multiple chronic conditions cluster? Health Serv Res 51(3):1135– 1151. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ 1475- 6773. 12401 Data Availability NCHD SRF data are published annually in a report 5. Buttorff C, Ruder T, Bauman M (2017) Multiple chronic con - and available online. ditions in the United States. https:// www . r and. org/ pubs/ t ools/ TL221. html. Accessed 1 Jan 2018 Code availability SPSS (IBM Corp. Released 2017. IBM SPSS Statis- 6. Cockerham WC, Hamby BW, Oates GR (2017) The social deter- tics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) was used minants of chronic disease. Am J Prev Med 52(1S1):S5–S12. for data analysis and is available upon request.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. amepre. 2016. 09. 010 7. Funk C, Parker K (2018) Women and men in STEM often at odds over workplace equity. Pew Research Center Declarations 8. Ginther DK, Schaffer WT, Schnell J, Masimore B, Liu F, Haak LL, Kington R (2011) Race, ethnicity, and NIH research awards. Ethics Approval Not applicable. Science 333(6045):1015–1019. https://doi. org/ 10. 1126/ scien ce. 11967 83 Consent to Participate Not applicable. 9. Levine CS, Ambady N (2013) The role of non-verbal behavior in racial disparities in health care: implications and solutions. Med Consent for Publication As this is an educational quality assurance Educ 47:867–876 program and not a human subjects study, consent for publication was 10. Medicine, Institute of. 2015. In the nation’s compelling interest: not required. ensuring diversity in health-care workforce. Washington, DC 2004. National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2015. Women, Minorities, and Per- Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests. sons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2015. Special Report NSF 15–311. Arlington, VA. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- 11 Raghupathi W, Raghupathi V (2018) An empirical study of bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- chronic diseases in the United States: a visual analytics approach. tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(3):431. https:// doi. org/ 10. as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 3390/ ijerp h1503 0431 provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://cr eativ ecommons. or g/licen ses/ b y/4.0/ . Authors and Affiliations 1,2 1 1,2 3 4 Marvella E. Ford  · Angela M. Malek  · Erica Martino  · Latecia Abraham‑Hilaire  · Oluwole Ariyo  · 5 6 7 8 1,2 2 Dana Burshell  · Gloria Callwood  · Laura Campbell  · Kimberly Cannady  · Courtney Chavis  · Brittney Crawford  · 2 2,9 10 11 12 8 Andie Edwards  · Victoria Findlay  · Rita Finley  · Chamiere Greenaway  · Tonya Hazelton  · Monique Hill  · 6 1,2 13 14 15 Marion Howard  · Kendrea D. Knight  · Vanessa Lopez‑Littleton  · Lloyd Moore  · Diandra Randle  · 3 15 16 17 15 18 David E. Rivers  · Judith D. Salley  · Terry Seabrook  · Sabra Slaughter  · James B. Stukes  · Roland J. Thorpe Jr.  · LaVerne Ragster 1 2 Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 95 3 12 Department of Public Information & Community Outreach College of Nursing, Medical University of South Carolina, Main Library, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA Charleston, SC 29425, USA California State University Monterey Bay, 100 Campus Department of Biology, Allen University, Columbia, Center, Seaside, CA 93955, USA SC 29204, USA National Environmental Justice Conference and Moore Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina Companies, Washington, D.C 20006, USA at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27516, USA Department of Biological & Physical Sciences, South School of Nursing, University of the Virgin Islands, Carolina State University, Orangeburg, SC 29115, USA Charlotte Amalie 00802, US Virgin Islands The Space Company, 82 ½ Spring Street, Charleston, College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, SC 29403, USA Charleston, SC 29425, USA Department of Medicine, Center for Health Disparities Department of Academic Affairs Faculty, Medical University Research, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA SC 29425, USA 9 18 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical Program for Research On Men’s Health, Hopkins Center University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA for Health Disparities Solutions, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, Department of Pathology and Anatomy, Morehouse School USA of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30310, USA University of the Virgin Islands, Charlotte Amalie 00802, Public Policy Department, Amerihealth Caritas Family US Virgin Islands of Companies, Philadelphia, PA 19113, USA 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cancer Education Springer Journals

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/the-national-conference-on-health-disparities-student-research-forum-uHTvX0YXQE

References (15)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021
ISSN
0885-8195
eISSN
1543-0154
DOI
10.1007/s13187-021-02082-3
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The annual National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) was launched in 2000. It unites health professionals, research- ers, community leaders, and government officials, and is a catalyzing force in developing policies, research interventions, and programs that address prevention, social determinants, health disparities, and health equity. The NCHD Student Research Forum (SRF) was established in 2011 at the Medical University of South Carolina to build high-quality biomedical research presentation capacity in primarily underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional students. This paper describes the unique research training and professional development aspects of the NCHD SRF. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and professional development workshops on finding a mentor and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with mentors. Between 2011 and 2018, 400 undergraduate and graduate/professional students participated in the NCHD SRF. Most students were women (80.5%). Approximately half were African American or black (52.3%), 18.0% were white, and 21.3% were of Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. The NCHD SRF is unique in several ways. First, it provides detailed instructions on developing a scientific abstract, including content area examples. Second, it establishes a mandatory pre-conference training webinar demonstrating how to prepare a scientific poster. Third, it works with the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans to help identify potential sources of travel funding for students with accepted abstracts. These features make the NCHD SRF different from many other conferences focused on students’ scientific presentations. Keywords United States · Health disparities · Underrepresented students · Conference · Professional development Introduction However, young adults are not entering biomedical science careers (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, Statement of the Problem and specifically physical, health, and life sciences [STEM]) at commensurate rates as previous generations, especially The Shortage of Diverse Biomedical Scientists in South those who are racially and ethnically diverse, from rural Carolina and the United States areas, and from low socioeconomic-position backgrounds [3] Since 2000, the percentage of underrepresented minori- The Millennial Generation, comprising 26% of the popu- ties receiving degrees in engineering and the physical sci- lation, is the most diverse in United States (US) history. ences has been flat [ 3]. According to a 2018 PEW Research Center report, African American and Hispanic workers con- tinue to be underrepresented in the STEM workforce. Afri- * Marvella E. Ford can Americans comprise 11% of the US workforce overall, fordmar@musc.edu but represent only 9% of STEM workers, while Hispanics Extended author information available on the last page of the article Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 86 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 comprise 16% of the US workforce but represent only 7% patient-provider communication, and better educational of all STEM workers [7]. However, within job clusters, the experiences for biomedical students during their training [1, representation of African Americans and Hispanics varies 2, 9]. Increasing the number of diverse investigators who are widely. To cite an example, 37% of licensed practical and well-trained in rigorous methodological and analytical prin- vocational nurses are either African American or Hispanic. ciples of research is a critical step toward increasing capacity In contrast, healthcare jobs requiring higher levels of edu- in health equity research and toward decreasing disparities cation and with higher pay scales have smaller percentages in health outcomes. of workers who are African American or Hispanic, including physicians and surgeons (11%), pharmacists (10%), dentists Rationale for the National Conference on Health Disparities (9%), and physical therapists (9%). Only 5% of optometrists, Student Research Forum veterinarians, and chiropractors are African American or Hispanic [7]. At the same time, the prevalence of chronic The central purpose of the National Conference on Health diseases (including cancer, diabetes, stroke, heart disease, Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF) is to obesity, and oral diseases) in the US is rapidly increasing, build capacity in biomedical sciences research in primarily to the extent that nearly half (45% of the 329,987,196 people underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional in the US) suffer from at least one of these diseases [11]. students. To address the shortage of racially/ethnically Chronic diseases, by definition, last for more than 1 year diverse biomedical professionals in the US workforce, Con- and are often accompanied by minor to significant functional gressman Jim Clyburn and former Congresswoman Donna limitations [4, 5]. Therefore, the demand for chronic dis- Christensen, who co-lead the annual NCHD, decided to ease prevention, screening, and treatment services will grow include a SRF as part of the NCHD. A critical component commensurately over the next two decades as the proportion of the NCHD is the SRF, which was developed in 2011 at of older adults in the US increases. It is imperative that we the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) to build equip larger numbers of diverse, post-Millennial Generation high-quality research presentation capacity in underrepre- students with the skill sets, and cultivate in them the moti- sented undergraduate and graduate/professional students vation, required to attain and excel in biomedical careers as across the US. part of a solution to the problem of insufficient healthcare workers to care for an aging America. To improve health outcomes, investigators must under- Methods stand the science behind the disease. Chronic disease is a multi-step disease process resulting from a series of bio- To maximize the benefits of the 1-day annual NCHD SRF, a logic, social, and environmental changes that abrogate strategic approach to training and mentoring undergraduate normal cellular growth controls [6]. Advances in chronic and graduate/professional students in the art of scientific disease research will require well-trained, interactive, and presentations is included. The methods used in developing productive scientists with the ability to understand and and implementing the SRF are described below. manipulate molecular, cellular, and genetic events within a physiological context, as well as social and environmental Call for Abstracts contexts. A landmark review by Ginther et al. [8] noted that African Americans are 10% less likely than whites to receive The NCHD SRF Planning Committee issues a national National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Project Grant Call for Abstracts four months prior to the due date of the (R01) funding, a marker of independent investigator status, abstracts. In keeping with the theme of training the next gen- even after controlling for demographic characteristics, edu- eration of health disparities researchers and policy makers, cation and training, and research productivity among other the Call for Abstracts includes the statement that the mission measures. of the NCHD is to focus on policies, research interventions, Given the potential for dramatic workforce shortages due and programs that address prevention, social determinants, to the reasons mentioned above, particularly among under- and personal responsibility in reducing health disparities represented populations, it is imperative to devise strate- and promoting health equity. Abstracts from the following gies and execute well-planned training programs designed categories are invited for submission: (a) basic sciences, (b) to enhance the scope and diversity of the next generation clinical sciences, (c) population sciences/behavioral sci- of chronic disease researchers and clinician scientists. As ences/social sciences, and (d) environmental sciences. The noted by the Institute of Medicine [10], greater diversity Call for Abstracts also notes that required national poster and among medical researchers and clinicians leads to improved oral presentation training webinars will take place prior to access to care among racially and ethnically diverse popu- the NCHD SRF for students whose abstracts were accepted, lations, greater patient choice and satisfaction, improved to enhance the students’ presentation skills. 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 87 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place ranked poster presentations in the Abstract Submission Guidelines undergraduate and graduate/professional student categories, respectively ($500, $300, and $200). Furthermore, the two The guidelines for abstract submissions are posted on the NCHD website. The guidelines document explicitly states oral presenters each receive a cash award of $100 as well as a scholarship to cover the costs of their airfare and hotel that all abstracts must include the following information: (1) hypothesis or statement about the problem being inves- charges. The funds for the airfare, hotel costs, poster pres- entation cash prizes, and the oral presentation cash awards tigated and why the research is important, (2) methods, (3) results and discussion of findings, (4) conclusions and future are awarded by the NCHD. The Wufoo online form builder platform is used for the research directions, and (5) acknowledgement of funder(s). The guidelines for abstract submissions document also abstract submission process. This platform allows for the collection of supplemental data related to the abstract sub- includes information to assist the students as they prepare their abstracts. This information is more explicit than the mission, such as the student’s contact information (name, mailing address, email address, telephone number); gender; information that would typically be included in a call for abstracts to serve as a learning tool for the students: (1) Only undergraduate or graduate/professional student status; col- lege or university; name and email address of the student’s one poster abstract can be submitted per student as primary author. However, a student may be listed as a co‐author on dean, research mentor, faculty advisor, and department chair; category of research (i.e., clinical sciences); abstract title and a second abstract. (2) Students working in the same labora- tory must independently submit original abstracts. Identi- authors; the actual abstract; whether a student was applying for a travel scholarship; and the level of travel scholarship cal abstracts submitted by different students will be auto- matically rejected. (3) Approval must be obtained from for which the student is applying (hotel costs only). The stu- dents are responsible for paying the conference registration all co‐authors listed on the abstract; failure to do so will result in the immediate rejection of the abstract. (4) Stu- fees, which include breakfast, lunch, and evening networking receptions. dents must obtain approval from their faculty advisor(s)/ research mentor(s) before submitting the abstract; failure to do so will result in the immediate rejection of the abstract. (5) Abstracts must be written by the student and reviewed Responding to Students’ Questions During the Abstract Submission Process by their faculty advisor or research mentor. (6) Abstracts must adhere to the highest quality standards—with correct During the abstract submission process, students send the grammar, spelling, and sentence structure (i.e., with editing and proofreading prior to submission). (7) Data tables and NCHD SRF organizers several different questions. Examples of the questions and responses are listed below. figures are not to be included with the abstract. (8) Abstracts are limited to a maximum of 300 words. Question: Am I allowed to present a poster on work that The guidelines for abstract submissions document also include links to the following helpful guides on developing I completed during a recent undergraduate internship if I am now in graduate/professional school? Response: Yes. an abstract: Your abstract will still be judged in the graduate/profes- • sional student category. http:// writi ngcen ter. unc. edu/ hando uts/ abstr acts/ • http:// rc. rcjou rnal. com/ conte nt/ 49/ 10/ 1206. full. pdf Question: May I see my abstract review comments? • Response: Yes, we will send the comments to you. http://www .c hemis tryvie ws.or g/de tails/ educa tion/ 27095 21/ T ips_ for_ Wr iti ng_ Be tter_ Scien ce_ P apers_ A bs tr Question: Several of my classmates and I worked on the same project. Can we each submit an abstract about the act_3. html project? Response: Yes, as long as each abstract focuses on a different analytic outcome related to the project. Incentivizing Students from Academic Institutions Across the US to Submit Abstracts Question: I work in a research team. Other students on my team submitted abstracts that were accepted but mine To further incentivize the students to submit their abstracts was not. Could you please explain this? Response: Each abstract is reviewed independently by a set of scientific for the NCHD SRF, the Call for Abstracts also notes that tiered scholarships to support hotel costs will be available reviewers based on the listed review criteria. Question: Could I choose to give an oral vs poster presen- on a limited basis for students with the highest-ranked abstracts, based on the abstract review scores. The students tation? Response: The abstracts with the highest scores in the undergraduate and the graduate/professional student may apply for the competitive scholarships for hotel support when they submit their abstracts. The Call for Abstracts also category will be selected for oral presentation in addition to poster presentation. includes a statement that cash prizes will be awarded to the 1 3 88 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 proper labeling of figures and graphs in the poster presenta- Abstract Review Process tion, and using a software program to develop the presenta- tion. Additionally, the dimensions of the poster boards that Abstracts are evaluated by faculty from across the US who serve on the NCHD SRF Planning Committee and/ will be used are sent to the students along with the required poster dimensions, which are dependent on the size of the or the Abstract Review Sub-Committee. Reviewers are assigned abstracts to review in either the undergraduate or poster boards that are rented at the conference location each year. the graduate/professional student categories, resulting in a separate set of reviewers for each category. Each abstract NCHD SRF Agenda is assigned to two reviewers who independently evalu- ate the abstract using the following five criteria, each of The NCHD SRF takes place from 7:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. on which has a maximum value of 20 points, for a total of 100 possible points: (1) originality and innovation, (2) a Wednesday in late June, and the day prior to the NCHD conference which occurs from Thursday to Saturday. The scientific content supported by quantitative information, (3) merit of the research, (4) quality of the written con- NCHD SRF agenda includes: (1) a welcome and overview; (2) oral presentations by the undergraduate and gradu- tent, and (5) relevance and adherence to guidelines and format. Abstracts ranked with a score that is equivalent ate/professional students, respectively, with the highest abstract scores; (3) poster presentations judged by faculty to or exceeds the mean score for the undergraduate or the graduate/professional student categories, respectively, from across the US during the conference; (4) a keynote speaker presentation during lunch, followed by a breakout are accepted for presentation. Abstract acceptance/non- acceptance notifications as well as selection for the travel for undergraduate and graduate/professional students; (5) roundtable discussions held for graduate/professional stu- awards are sent to the students after the abstract reviews have been completed. The notifications are sent at least dents in the areas of mentoring/networking, professional eth- ics, and identifying research opportunities; (6) roundtable 2 months prior to the conference to allow the students time to prepare their poster and/or oral presentations, discussions held for undergraduate students about applying to graduate or professional school; (7) a workshop held for and to identify alternative and/or supplemental sources of travel funds. undergraduate students on preparing abstracts for future scientific meetings; and (8) a presentation of an interactive Additionally, unlike most other student conferences, a Financial Assistance Sub-Committee of the SRF, with learning module by a National Library of Medicine staff member. the student’s permission, contacts the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans of each stu- Poster Review Criteria dent whose abstract was accepted, to inform them that the student’s abstract was accepted and to work with them to The NCHD SRF includes three main categories by which identify potential sources of funding to support the student’s participation in the NCHD SRF. The Financial Assistance the posters are evaluated, as well an overall review category. The four review categories are: research content (42 points Sub-Committee members first contacts each student’s research mentor and faculty advisor. If those contacts do not maximum), presentation delivery (30 points maximum), poster quality (24 points maximum), and overall presenta- lead to the successful identification of funding sources, then the sub-committee members contact the student’s depart- tion quality (6 points maximum). Therefore, the maximum score for each poster is 102 points. ment chair and/or dean. The research content category includes seven compo- nents: (1) the research has merit and makes a contribution National Webinar Training in Poster and Oral Presentations to the field of study, (2) the abstract accurately summa- rizes the research presented, (3) the introduction provides To assist the students whose abstracts were accepted with brief yet pertinent information about the project, (4) the methodology is appropriate for the research presented, preparing their posters and oral presentations, the NCHD SRF conducts a national training webinar which was initi- (5) appropriate methods of analysis for interpretation are utilized, (6) the results are detailed and explained accu- ated in 2014 to improve the quality of the scientific research that is presented. The webinar includes key points related to rately, and (7) the presentation provides implications for future research and/or practical application. A maximum developing an effective poster presentation, including the appropriate design and layout, the order of the information score of 6 points is possible for each component for which the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above that is presented (e.g., Introduction, Purpose, Sample, Meth- ods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, and References), the Average). identification of the audience for the poster presentation, the 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 89 The presentation delivery category includes five com- Results ponents: (1) the presenter responded f luently to questions regarding their work, (2) the presenter was enthusiastic Between 2011 and 2018, a total of 407 undergraduate about the research and utilizes both the poster and per- and graduate/professional students participated in the sonal knowledge of the subject to present the research, (3) NCHD SRF or 58 students per year on average, as shown the presenter had a strong understanding of the informa- in Table 1. Most participants were female (80.8%). With tion and the topic, (4) the presenter was an active partici- regard to race and ethnicity, approximately half of the pant in presenting the research (interested in questions, NCHD SRF students were African American or black outgoing, knowledgeable about the research topic), and (52.1%), 17.9% were white, 21.6% were of Hispanic/ (5) the presenter’s mannerisms (eye contact and gestures) Latinx ethnicity, and the remainder (8.4%) were of Asian contributed to the explanation of the research. A maxi- or other racial/ethnic groups including American Indian or mum score of 6 points is possible for each component for Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, which the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 and unknown race. Table 1 describes the gender charac- (Above Average). teristics of all of the student participants. However, due The poster quality category includes four components to the small number of American Indian/Alaska Native, with a maximum score of 6 points each: (1) the poster con- Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Asian stu- tent was grammatically correct, (2) the presenter used the dent participants, Table 1 only describes the racial/ethnic available poster space effectively, (3) all required elements characteristics for African American or black, white, and (abstract, introduction, procedures, discussion, etc.) were Hispanic/Latinx student participants. apparent and easy to follow, and (4) all figures, charts, Figure 1 shows that the NCHD SRF participants rep- images, and graphs were properly presented and contained resent the East Coast, West Coast, Southeast, and Mid- information relevant to the central topic. A maximum west regions of the US, as well as international locations. score of 6 points is possible for each component for which The Supplemental Table (Online Resource 1) displays the scale ranges from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above the specific location of each NCHD and the academic Average). The final category by which the posters were institutions of SRF participants by year. In addition, the judged is an overall category. It provides a scale ranging categories of presented abstracts and poster winners of from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 6 (Above Average) and the NCHD SRF for 2011–2018 are displayed by year in reflects the judges’ overall evaluative review of the poster. Table 2. Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF) participants by year and location 2011 2012 Little 2013 St. 2014 Long 2016 Wash- 2017 New 2018 Phila- p-value Total, n = 407 Charleston, Rock, AR, Thomas, Beach, CA, ington, DC, Orleans, LA, delphia, PA, (%) SC, n = 57 n = 64 (%) US Virgin n = 64 (%) n = 61 (%) n = 36 (%) n = 38 (%) (%) Islands, n = 87 (%) Gender   Male 12 (21.1) 13 (20.3) 12 (13.8) 9 (14.1) 13 (21.3) 7 (19.4) 12 (31.6) 0.29 78 (19.2)   Female 45 (78.9) 51 (79.7) 75 (86.2) 55 (85.9) 48 (78.7) 29 (80.6) 26 (72.2) 329 (80.8) Race/Ethnicity   African 39 (68.4) 35 (61.4) 63 (77.8) 15 (24.6) 28 (50.9) 10 (35.7) 22 (64.7) 0.00 212 (56.8) Ameri- can or Black   White 7 (12.3) 8 (14.0) 6 (7.4) 11 (18.0) 18 (32.7) 12 (42.9) 11 (32.4) 73 (19.6)   Hispanic/ 11 (19.3) 14 (24.6) 12 (14.8) 35 (54.7) 9 (16.4) 6 (21.4) 1 (2.9) 88 (23.6) Latinx Abbreviations: SC South Carolina, AR Arkansas, US United States, CA California, DC District of Columbia, LA Louisiana, PA Pennsylvania, SD standard deviation The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 Participants of Asian (n = 27) and other racial/ethnic groups (n = 7; includes American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and unknown race) are not shown 1 3 90 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Fig. 1 National and interna- tional locations of academic institutions of students participating in the National Conference on Health Dispari- ties (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF), 2011-2018. Note: The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 such as Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Discussion Colorado, Utah, and Arizona. Some of these states have large Native American and Hispanic/Latinx populations, Since 2011, the NCHD SRF Planning Committee has led and research in these groups would be ideally suited for the coordination of the annual SRF of the NCHD. The all- presentation during the NCHD SRF. day NCHD  SRF for undergraduate and graduate/profes- Given the increasing interest and success of the sional students includes a poster session, oral presentations, program, the NCHD  SRF has since expanded to also a luncheon keynote speaker, and roundtable discussions. The offer mentorship and guidance related to academic and NCHS SRF also includes an interactive learning module professional career development. For example, this has presented by a National Library of Medicine staff member. included roundtable discussions on applying to gradu- The NCHD SRF appears to be reaching its focal group ate/professional school for undergraduate students. of participating students, African Americans and Hispanics/ For graduate/professional students, funding, mentor- Latinx, who are the most underrepresented groups in the ing, and making ethical decisions have been topics of biomedical sciences. These two groups had the highest rep- discussion. Prior to the next NCHD SRF, its leaders resentation among all of the students who participated in the will add a Q&A section to the NCHD SRF website to NCHD SRF to date. address past student’s questions to assist others in the From 2011 to 2016, academic partners in the cities where future as well as continuing to respond individually to the NCHD SRF took place were identified and assisted with each student’s questions. the recruitment of students. However, in 2017 and 2018, While the NCHD SRF has proven to be a successful academic partners were not identified who could serve in research training opportunity for undergraduate and gradu- this capacity. The lack of a local academic partner likely ate/professional students, its scope could be expanded to contributed to the lower numbers of participating students include high school students, who are at earlier stages of in 2017 and 2018 as compared with previous years. In the the research training pipeline. To accomplish this goal, in future, the NCHD SRF Planning Committee could enhance the future, the SRF Planning Committee could reach out their efforts to include academic partners in several states to local high school administrators to invite their students with large numbers of Hispanic/Latinx students, including to participate in the SRF. Arizona, New Mexico, Missouri, and Colorado. The NCHD SRF Planning Committee could also invite The quality of the poster and oral presentations has high school, undergraduate, and graduate/professional stu- improved steadily over the years as a result of the man- dents to join the Committee to provide input on the over- datory pre-conference training webinars. The NCHD all topics as well as the activities that take place during the SRF has included students from many regions of the NCHD SRF. Additionally, the NCHD SRF Planning Commit- US, including the Northwest, Southwest, Northeast, and tee could develop specific training activities related the edu- Southeast. However, in the future, greater efforts could be cation and career development of the high school students. made to advertise the NCHD SRF in Midwestern states 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 91 Table 2 Categories of presented abstracts and poster winners of the National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) Student Research Forum (SRF), 2011–2018* 2011 (n = 21) 2012 (n = 39) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 4   Basic Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 2   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 3   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 11   Environmental Sciences: 0   Environmental Sciences: 0 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 2   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 10   Population Sciences/Behavioral Sciences/Social Sciences: 19   Environmental Sciences: 0   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: N/A   1st place: Madhulika Vulimiri, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,   2nd place: N/A Poster Title: Patient and Provider Perspectives of Community-based Diabetes   3rd place: N/A Health Promoter-led Intervention Graduate/professional student poster winners   2nd place: Kai Carey, Philander Smith College, Poster Title: Role of TGM2 and   1st place: N/A CIN85 in the Radiation Resistance of Pancreatic Cancer Cells   2nd place: N/A   3rd place: Lakeisha Watson, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Poster   3rd place: N/A Title: Risk factors and HIV Education in Rural Counties in North Carolina among African Americans Graduate/professional student poster winners   1st place: Brittney Mull, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Discrimination in Health Care Settings: Perspectives of Latino Patients   2nd place: Lizette Alvarez, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Previous Nutrition Education and its Influence on the Outcomes of Nutri- tion Education Programs at Point of Purchase   3rd place: Feana Francis Devaraj, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Poster Title: Naturally Derived Compounds and their Cytotoxicity in Pancreatic Cancer Cell Lines 2013 (n = 32) 2014 (n = 55) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 0   Basic Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 5   Sciences/Social Sciences: 15   Environmental Sciences: 1   Environmental Sciences: 0 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 2   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 22   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Environmental Sciences: 0   Sciences/Social Sciences: 34 Undergraduate student poster winners   Environmental Sciences: 2 st   1 place: Kendra Hearn, Spellman College, Poster Title: Lapatinib and Undergraduate student poster winners st Neratinib: Using Combination Drug Therapy to Advance the Effect of the   1 place: Nanci Alanis Alcantara, University of Illinois at Chicago, Poster Treatment of HER2 Positive Breast Title: How do Different Stressors Relate to Body Mass Index Among U.S. and nd   2 place: Nicole Crawford, Georgia Southern University, Poster Title: Inti- Immigrant-born Latinas? nd mate Partner Violence: A Silent Phenomenon   2 place: Joaquin Magana, Occidental College, Poster Title: Developing a rd   3 place: Sarah Wolf, University of the Virgin Islands, Poster Title: Factors qPCR Assay to Quantify Relative Telomere Length; a Tool to Investigate the Contributing to Fecal Indicator Bacteria in Brewer’s Bay, USVI Basic Science of Health Disparities rd Graduate/professional student poster winners   3 place: Marina Armendariz, California State University- Long Beach, Poster st   1 place: Angelika Clarke, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Obesity- related Eating Habits Heighten Risk for Type 2 Diabetes among Title: Risk Factors for Early Pubertal Onset in African American Girls at-risk Latino College Students nd   2 place: Yamisha Rutherford, Morehouse School of Medicine, Poster Title: Graduate/professional student poster winners st Weight Change as a Predictor of Physical Health Among African American   1 place: Tanya Troy, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Poster Title: Breast Cancer Survivors Advance Directives in an Older African American Population: What are the rd   3 place: Eugenia Maravilla, California State University-Long Beach, Poster Attitudes and Barriers to Completion? A Pilot Study nd Title: The Potential Antimicrobial Activity of Locusta Migratoria Apolipo-   2 place: Jasmine Travers, Columbia University School of Nursing, Poster Title: phorin III Does State Legislation Improve Nursing Workforce Diversity? rd   3 place: Lorena Rodriguez, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: Does Nutritional Training Increase Knowledge and Self-Efficacy among Promotores de Salud? 1 3 92 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Table 2 (continued) 2016 (n = 61) 2017 (n = 36) Undergraduate students Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 2   Basic Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 18   Sciences/Social Sciences: 12   Environmental Sciences: 7   Environmental Sciences: 1 Graduate/professional students Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 1   Basic Sciences: 1   Clinical Sciences: 3   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/ Social Sciences: 28   Sciences/Social Sciences: 18   Environmental Sciences: 1   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: Chiamaka Ani, University of Georgia, Poster Title: The Role of   1st place: Abbas Berjaoui, Wayne State University, Poster Title: Health Dispari- Stat6 in Altering the Microbiota During Helminth Infection ties among Arab Americans in Michigan: Results from the 2013 Arab Behavio-   2nd place: Joseph Real, The College of William & Mary, Poster Title: ral Risk Factors Survey Stretched Thin: Social and Environmental Barriers to Diabetes Management   2nd place: Mariam Khan, Santa Clara University, Poster Title: Understanding among Low-Income Patients at a Safety Net Clinic the Effects of Microaggressions and Acculturation Stress on the Mental Health   3rd place: Author Yao, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Title: of College Students Does “Confidence” Mediate the Relationship between English Proficiency   3rd place: Melody Nasser, California State University- Monterey Bay, Poster and Health Status among Asian Americans? Title: Evaluating Pathways to Homelessness in LGBTQ-Identifying Residents Graduate/professional student poster winners of San Francisco   1st place: Courtney Maclin-Akinyemi, University of Memphis, Poster Title: Graduate/professional student poster winners Profiles of African American Identity, Activity Engagement, SES, and   1st place: Mahalia Sam- Clarke, Claflin University, Poster Title: Directed Evolu- Comorbid Obesity-Hypertension: Implications for Culturally Tailored Inter- tion of Temperature Dependence of Activity in α/β Barrel Enzyme vention Development   2nd place: Janelle K. Dunne-Wylie, George Washington University, Poster Title:   2nd place: Angelina Majeno, California State University- Long Beach, Poster Patient Experiences with Family Planning in FQHCs: Disparities by Race, Title: Differences in Mental Health and Well-Being among Women Living in Ethnicity and Language Long Beach, California   3rd place: Monique McLeary, University of North Carolina- Greensboro, Poster   3rd place: Christina Gladney, University of Florida, Poster Title: The Effects Title: Support of Disordered Eating Behaviors in Online Spaces: A Content of Father Absence on Daughter’s Development Analysis of the ProED Subreddit 2018 (n = 21) Undergraduate students   Basic Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 1   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 3   Environmental Sciences: 1 Graduate/professional students   Basic Sciences: 0   Clinical Sciences: 0   Population Sciences/Behavioral   Sciences/Social Sciences: 16   Environmental Sciences: 0 Undergraduate student poster winners   1st place: David Chime, Allen University, Poster Title: The Effects of Crude Oil Spillage and Eventual Bioaccumulation in Humans   2nd place: Victoria Rai, University of Michigan, Poster Title: Unmet Need for Fetal Assessment amongst High-Risk Pregnancies in a Rural District Hospital   3rd place: Monica Taneja, John Hopkins University, Poster Title: Lifestyle, Ethnicity, and Inflammation Prevalence among Breast Cancer Survivors and Women Without Breast Cancer: A Comparison Using NHANES Graduate/professional student poster winners   1st place: Donica’ Beckett, University of Nevada- Los Vegas, Poster Title: Exploring PrEP Attitudes, Barriers and Facilitators of Use, Sexual Risk Behaviors and Communication Channel Preferences of Self-Reported Hetero- sexual African American/Black Students Enrolled in Jefferson County, Texas Colleges   2nd place: Elizabeth Duxbury, University of California- San Diego, Poster Title: Associations Between Education, Physical and Emotional Health, and Social Support in San Diego   3rd place: Veronica Morawek, The Catholic University of America, Poster Title: Psychosocial Factors Associated with Health Perception in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Alejandra Kaplan, Montclair State University, Poster Title: Exploring Accul- turation as it Relates to Sociodemographic and Behavioral Factors Underlying Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Prevention Behaviors in New Jersey The NCHD SRF was not held in 2015 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 93 the conference website, and inclusion in the Souvenir Con- Impact of the NCHD SRF ference Program, among others. The NCHD SRF has had significant impacts on the career trajectories of many of the student participants. For exam- ple, a previous Hispanic/Latinx NCHD SRF poster pre- senter was a doctoral student at MUSC. The work that she Strengths and Limitations presented at the NCHD SRF was based on a Diversity Sup- plement. She is now an Epidemiologist at a health research While the change in funding support for the NCHD SRF appears to have resulted in a smaller number of students center in Florida. Another NCHD SRF participant presented a poster while who participate each year, it has also resulted in a broader geographic distribution of the academic institutions of the she was a doctoral student at the University of Nevada Las Vegas. She is Native American and is now an Assistant Pro- participating students. A limitation of the NCHD SRF is the higher rate of conference participation among women fessor in a College of Population Health. She recently iden- tified five of her underrepresented Master of Public Health when compared with men. In the future, the NCHD SRF organizers will make an effort to increase the participation of (MPH) students and helped them to submit abstracts of their scientific work to the 2020 NCHD SRF (which was post- men by reaching out to local community groups and student organizations including barbershops, fraternities, social jus- poned due to the COVID-19 pandemic). A previous NCHD SRF participant later became the tice organizations, science clubs, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) groups, student unions, athletic clubs and Director of Health Equity for the Health Commission of a major urban area. Her role in this position is to promote sports leagues, and churches. health equity in the city’s health and health care practices. She stood during an NCHD and publicly stated that her par- ticipation in the NCHD SRF solidified her commitment to a career in health equity and gave her the confidence to pursue Conclusion her current role. The  NCHD SRF differs from many existing national meetings in that it provides distinct value-added activi- Sustainability ties including capacity-building, research training, and presentation experience that are not available in other From 2011 to 2014, the NCHD covered all of the travel costs of the student participants, including air travel, hotel costs, national meetings that are valuable to both undergradu- ate and graduate/professional students alike. Additionally, and meals. After 2014, the full travel scholarships grew too cost-prohibitive for the NCHD. Therefore, starting in 2016, the NCHD SRF focuses on underrepresented groups in STEM, particularly African Americans/blacks and His- the NCHD has supported the hotel costs of 20 students (with two students per hotel room), and supported the full travel panic/Latinx students. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and costs of the two oral presenters (one undergraduate student and one graduate/professional student). The NCHD SRF also methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and pro- fessional development workshops on finding a mentor formed a Financial Assistance Sub-Committee consisting of three individuals who contact the research mentors, faculty and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with advisors, chairs, and deans of the students whose abstracts were accepted to help them to identify potential sources of mentors. In summary, the NCHD SRF presents an ideal opportunity to invest in future leaders through career and funding at each student’s academic institutions, as well as potential funding from other sources such as fraternities and professional development activities, including mentorship. sororities, local businesses, and scientific organizations. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- Funding is needed to sustain the NCHD SRF and attend- tary material available at https://doi. or g/10. 1007/ s13187- 021- 02082-3 . ance at the annual meeting which takes place at a different institution each year. Local and national partners are actively Acknowledgements The NCHD SRF Planning Committee thanks all being identified and welcomed to build relationships with sponsors, staff, faculty, and poster judges, students, for their support. The authors would like to thank the late Mr. Leroy Lewis for his unwa- individuals and organizations committed to improving health vering commitment and dedication to the NCHD SRF. Special thanks and development. go to Dr. David E. Rivers and Dr. Sabra Slaughter for their visionary We accomplish this through various levels of sponsorship leadership and continued support. opportunities ($5,000; $10,000; $25,000+; and $50,000+) and benefits such as complimentary conference registra- Author Contribution All authors contributed to the study conception and design. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. tions and exhibit space, logo placement and URL link on 1 3 94 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 Funding This work was supported by US Department of Defense References (DOD) Southeastern Virtual Institute for Health Equity and Well- ness grants W81XWH-11–2-0164 and W81XWH-10–2-0057; US 1. Alexandraki I, Mooradian AD (2013) Redesigning medical educa- DOD grant W81XWH-12–1-0043;National Institutes of Health tion to improve health care delivery and outcomes. Health Care (NIH) grants P20CA157071, R01MD005892, U54CA210962, Manag (Frederick) 32(1):37–42. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1097/ HCM. UL1TR001450, and P30CA138313; National Institute on Minor- 0b013 e3182 7ed8fa ity Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) grant U54MD000214; 2. Ashton CM, Haidet P, Paterniti DA, Collins TC, Gordon HS, National Institute on Aging (NIA) grant  K02AG059140; NIH/ O’Malley K, Petersen LA et al (2003) Racial and ethnic dispari- National Cancer Institute (NCI) grants  R25 CA193088—South ties in the use of health services: bias, preferences, or poor com- Carolina Cancer Health Equity Consortium (SC CHEC): Summer munication? J Gen Intern Med 18(2):146–152 Undergraduate Research Training Program and; P30CA138313- 3. Baine C (2000) Women and minorities in STEM careers: advanc- 10S2—Cancer Center Support Grant Administrative Supplement to ing our world. STEM Strengthen NCI Supported Community Outreach Capacity through 4. Basu J, Avila R, Ricciardi R (2016) Hospital readmission rates Community Health Educators (CHEs) of the National Outreach in U.S. states: are readmissions higher where more patients with Network (NON)). multiple chronic conditions cluster? Health Serv Res 51(3):1135– 1151. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ 1475- 6773. 12401 Data Availability NCHD SRF data are published annually in a report 5. Buttorff C, Ruder T, Bauman M (2017) Multiple chronic con - and available online. ditions in the United States. https:// www . r and. org/ pubs/ t ools/ TL221. html. Accessed 1 Jan 2018 Code availability SPSS (IBM Corp. Released 2017. IBM SPSS Statis- 6. Cockerham WC, Hamby BW, Oates GR (2017) The social deter- tics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) was used minants of chronic disease. Am J Prev Med 52(1S1):S5–S12. for data analysis and is available upon request.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. amepre. 2016. 09. 010 7. Funk C, Parker K (2018) Women and men in STEM often at odds over workplace equity. Pew Research Center Declarations 8. Ginther DK, Schaffer WT, Schnell J, Masimore B, Liu F, Haak LL, Kington R (2011) Race, ethnicity, and NIH research awards. Ethics Approval Not applicable. Science 333(6045):1015–1019. https://doi. org/ 10. 1126/ scien ce. 11967 83 Consent to Participate Not applicable. 9. Levine CS, Ambady N (2013) The role of non-verbal behavior in racial disparities in health care: implications and solutions. Med Consent for Publication As this is an educational quality assurance Educ 47:867–876 program and not a human subjects study, consent for publication was 10. Medicine, Institute of. 2015. In the nation’s compelling interest: not required. ensuring diversity in health-care workforce. Washington, DC 2004. National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2015. Women, Minorities, and Per- Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests. sons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2015. Special Report NSF 15–311. Arlington, VA. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- 11 Raghupathi W, Raghupathi V (2018) An empirical study of bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- chronic diseases in the United States: a visual analytics approach. tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(3):431. https:// doi. org/ 10. as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 3390/ ijerp h1503 0431 provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://cr eativ ecommons. or g/licen ses/ b y/4.0/ . Authors and Affiliations 1,2 1 1,2 3 4 Marvella E. Ford  · Angela M. Malek  · Erica Martino  · Latecia Abraham‑Hilaire  · Oluwole Ariyo  · 5 6 7 8 1,2 2 Dana Burshell  · Gloria Callwood  · Laura Campbell  · Kimberly Cannady  · Courtney Chavis  · Brittney Crawford  · 2 2,9 10 11 12 8 Andie Edwards  · Victoria Findlay  · Rita Finley  · Chamiere Greenaway  · Tonya Hazelton  · Monique Hill  · 6 1,2 13 14 15 Marion Howard  · Kendrea D. Knight  · Vanessa Lopez‑Littleton  · Lloyd Moore  · Diandra Randle  · 3 15 16 17 15 18 David E. Rivers  · Judith D. Salley  · Terry Seabrook  · Sabra Slaughter  · James B. Stukes  · Roland J. Thorpe Jr.  · LaVerne Ragster 1 2 Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA 1 3 Journal of Cancer Education (2023) 38:85–95 95 3 12 Department of Public Information & Community Outreach College of Nursing, Medical University of South Carolina, Main Library, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA Charleston, SC 29425, USA California State University Monterey Bay, 100 Campus Department of Biology, Allen University, Columbia, Center, Seaside, CA 93955, USA SC 29204, USA National Environmental Justice Conference and Moore Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina Companies, Washington, D.C 20006, USA at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27516, USA Department of Biological & Physical Sciences, South School of Nursing, University of the Virgin Islands, Carolina State University, Orangeburg, SC 29115, USA Charlotte Amalie 00802, US Virgin Islands The Space Company, 82 ½ Spring Street, Charleston, College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, SC 29403, USA Charleston, SC 29425, USA Department of Medicine, Center for Health Disparities Department of Academic Affairs Faculty, Medical University Research, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA SC 29425, USA 9 18 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical Program for Research On Men’s Health, Hopkins Center University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA for Health Disparities Solutions, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, Department of Pathology and Anatomy, Morehouse School USA of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30310, USA University of the Virgin Islands, Charlotte Amalie 00802, Public Policy Department, Amerihealth Caritas Family US Virgin Islands of Companies, Philadelphia, PA 19113, USA 1 3

Journal

Journal of Cancer EducationSpringer Journals

Published: Feb 1, 2023

Keywords: United States; Health disparities; Underrepresented students; Conference; Professional development

There are no references for this article.