No abstract

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) are at the forefront of the United States (US) public health agenda due to their tremendous human and financial burden. Further, disproportionately high ADRD rates among racial/ethnic minorities require incorporating the unique perspectives of racially and ethnically diverse scientists, which will necessitate diversifying the scientific workforce that investigates disparities in aging. The purpose of this paper is to describe the training and mentorship initiatives of the National Institute on Aging (NIA)-funded Carolina Center on Alzheimer's Disease and Minority Research, emphasizing lessons learned from our engagement with underrepresented minority and minoritized (URM) Scientists. We highlight three aims of the Center's training and mentorship component: (1) Fund pilot projects for URM Scientists conducting research on sociocultural, behavioral, and environmental factors that influence ADRD-related health disparities; (2) Provide mentorship to build the research capacity of Center Scientists; and (3) Offer research education in Health Disparities and Minority Aging Research to Center Scientists and interested researchers at all partner institutions. Our experience may be a practical resource for others developing interdisciplinary training programs to increase the pipeline of URM Scientists conducting ADRD research.

This paper presents reflections on mentorship from scientists and mentors of the National Institute on Aging (NIA)-funded Carolina Center on Alzheimer’s Disease and Minority Research (CCADMR). Using a network approach to mentoring, this program aims to increase the pipeline of underrepresented minority (URM) scientists studying Alzheimer’s disease (AD) disparities. Six mentors and five scientists participated in interviews. Thematic analysis identified recurring themes; transcripts of mentors and scientists were compared. Most common thematic categories identified by mentors included experience interacting with scientists, goals as a mentor, recruitment of underrepresented minorities, scientists’ challenges, and programmatic qualities. The most mentioned categories by scientists were challenges, seminars, working with mentors, career development, and project experience. The CCADMR will use findings to enhance the experience and training methods for future grant years. Results can benefit other training programs focused on aging and AD.

Background Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) are at the forefront of the United States (US) public health agenda, with a disproportionate impact on racial/ethnic minorities. Aging scholars have called for prioritizing ADRD disparities research and addressing the systems that promote research as essential to achieving equity in healthy aging scholarship. In 2018, the National Institute on Aging (NIA)‐funded, Carolina Center on Alzheimer’s Disease and Minority Research (CCADMR) was founded to increase the diversity of the research workforce in population health and ADRD disparities. The CCADMR provides underrepresented minority (URM), junior/mid‐career faculty scientists with opportunities for pilot grant funding, mentorship by senior faculty, and health disparities‐focused training. We share evaluation findings from the training and mentorship components of the Center. Method Using a mixed methods approach, we analyzed data from quarterly scientist progress reports, interviews with mentors and scientists, and health disparities seminar evaluations. Result Nine scientists have been chosen as pilot project awardees since Center inception. They represent four academic institutions and have implemented disparities‐focused ADRD research ranging from estimating the prevalence of clusters of multi‐morbidity by ADRD type and race, to understanding the determinants of ADRD for African Americans to inform the development of a social robot to engage the community in ADRD‐related activities. Scientists have presented their research at aging and ADRD‐focused conferences, each with manuscripts currently under development. Qualitative interview data (N=9) show that mentors and scientists feel positively about the CCADMR, particularly the mentorship component. Junior scientists have a strong desire to advance their ADRD research, but they face challenges partly due to their institutions’ emphasis on diversity, which typically force them to assume additional responsibilities, leaving limited time for their research. Evaluation data show that nearly 85% of seminar attendees are greatly satisfied with the speakers and content. Since the conversion to virtual seminars due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, over 90% of attendees report being “very satisfied” with speakers and content. Conclusion While the evaluation of CCADMR outcomes is ongoing, our experience may be a practical resource for others developing interdisciplinary training programs to increase the pipeline of URM scientists conducting ADRD research.