Careers of an elite cohort of U.S. basic life science postdoctoral fellows and the influence of their mentor's citation record

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is general agreement that the number of U.S. science PhDs being trained far exceeds the number of future academic positions. One suggested approach to this problem is to significantly reduce the number of PhD positions. A counter argument is that students are aware of the limited academic positions but have chosen a PhD track because it opens other, non-academic, opportunities. The latter view requires that students have objective information about what careers options will be available for them.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The scientific careers of the 1992-94 cohort of NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Kirchstein-NRSA F32 postdoctoral fellows (PD) was determined by following their publications (PubMed), grants (NIH and NSF), and faculty and industry positions through 2009. These basic life science PDs receive support through individual grant applications and represent the most successful class of NIH PDs as judged by academic careers and grants. The sex dependence of the career and grant success and the influence of the PD mentor's citation record were also determined</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 439 1992-94 NIGMS F32 fellows, the careers of 417 could be determined. Although females had significantly higher rates of dropping out of science (22% females, 9% males) there was no significant difference in the fraction of females that ended up as associate or full professors at research universities (22.8% females, 29.1% for males). More males then females ended up in industry (34% males, 22% females). Although there was no significant correlation between male grant success and their mentor's publication record (h index, citations, publications), there was a significant correlation for females. Females whose mentor's h index was in the top quartile were nearly 3 times as likely to receive a major grant as those whose mentors were in the bottom quartile (38.7% versus 13.3%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Sixteen years after starting their PD, only 9% of males had dropped out of science. More females (28%) have dropped out of science, primarily because fewer went into industry positions. The mentor's publication record does not affect the future grant success of males but it has a dramatic effect on female grant success.</p

Ten simple rules for aspiring graduate students.

Several supervillains have higher degrees—why don’t you? There can be a variety of reasons for wanting to go to grad school and for applying to a particular school and program. But often, one can only tell apart good and bad reasons from hindsight. Failing at something is perhaps the best way to know what can go wrong and what advice would have been useful when considering graduate school applications.We should know: one of us started graduate school 4 separate times, and another learned what a PhD was only after having started one; lost 2 supervisors before even starting to write her thesis, and yet another accepted a PhD offer from the lab where she was working, without considering any alternatives; finally, one of us had applied to graduate schools for 5 years (with 19 rejections) before finally landing a PhD offer from their dream school. We hope that our hard-earned lessons will help you to avoid some of the pitfalls that we ourselves fell prey to. In this article, we address how to choose a graduate program, how to apply strategically, and some of the key challenges that may arise along the way toward graduate school. Conveniently, our advice can be summarized as 10 simple rules . . . so here they are.The authors acknowledge the support of the Gates Cambridge Trust [AIL], Cancer Research UK [RRG], Alzheimer’s Society [CCN], Merck [CCN], and the Isaac Newton Trust [EG]

Ten simple rules for implementing open and reproducible research practices after attending a training course

Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things; however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices; (2) managing problems that arise during implementation; and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process

Ten simple rules for implementing open and reproducible research practices after attending a training course

Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things; however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices; (2) managing problems that arise during implementation; and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process