Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars program: adapting a summer scholars program to the virtual world amidst the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

The Mississippi IDeA Networks of Biomedical Research Excellence (INBRE) supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (Grant P20GM103476) launched the new Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars (MIOS) summer research program in 2019. The program was designed to offer students community outreach and research experiences related to the study of behavioral and health disparities life sciences. The program was adapted in early 2020 to offer the program in a fully online format in the summer of 2020. This article details the program adaptations and discusses program evaluation data related to scholars’ perceptions of program benefits and expectations and their confidence in research-related skills. The program evaluation was a mixed-method approach that included a qualitative postprogram survey and a pre-post quantitative survey. Scholars identified technical and communication skill building and resilience as areas of personal growth. Overall, the program met scholars’ expectations for the program and significantly improved their confidence on 8 of the 19 (with confidence interval estimated differences from 0.3 to 2.56, where a difference of 1 is an improvement across 1 anchor on a Likert-type scale) various research-related tasks/skills after completion of the program. The analyses presented demonstrated that a combined qualitative and quantitative analysis approach is useful for examining the extent to which programs such as Mississippi INBRE are meeting goals of providing a rich research experience in health disparities for a diverse student body. Future longitudinal data may be examined to explore the long-term impact of MIOS on career preparation and choices and graduate education.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY The Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars program is a summer research program for Mississippi college students that was successfully adapted to a fully online environment amidst the coronavirus-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION

The Institutional Development Award (IDeA), funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), is a congressionally mandated program that aims to empower states with historically lower NIH grant funding success rates to engage in biomedical research activities, including clinical and translational research (1). Many IDeA programs operate in rural and medically underserved communities, such as the state of Mississippi. Mississippi is one of twenty-four states in the nation that are eligible for IDeA awards, including the IDeA Networks of Biomedical Research Excellence (INBRE) research award program. INBRE awards were intended to improve institutional research capacity and provide research opportunities to students (2). Mississippi INBRE was established to support the development of multidisciplinary research networks with a broad biomedical or behavioral thematic focus that would serve to improve the health of Mississippians.

Mississippi INBRE is a network of colleges and universities with a mission to improve health throughout the state and engage talented researchers and students in biomedical research projects that will increase the state’s research competitiveness as well as impact the health of citizens of Mississippi. One of Mississippi INBRE’s four major efforts is to engage communities to address health disparities in Mississippi through the Community Engagement and Training Core (CETC). One of the CETC’s main goals is to build community research infrastructure by providing faculty and students with community-based participatory research experiences. The CETC is an interwoven community-academic partnership involving My Brother’s Keeper, Inc. and the Mississippi INBRE Telenutrition Center, which manages research activities and opportunities for faculty and students. The Telenutrition Center’s research activities include but are not limited to the following two examples: 1) conducting nutrition, physical activity, and health needs and behavioral assessments in collaboration with healthcare entities and 2) assessment of the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of an intensive behavior therapy for obesity program with and in a healthcare setting. My Brother’s Keeper, Inc. is a private nonprofit organization in Mississippi with a mission to reduce health disparities by improving health and well-being of minority and marginalized populations. The Mississippi INBRE Telenutrition Center is housed at The University of Southern Mississippi (USM) and aims to integrate community-engaged and technology-supported solutions to improve nutrition and related behaviors of Mississippians and address preventable chronic disease disparities. The CETC supports two college student research programs, one of which is the Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars (MIOS) program.

MIOS is a summer research program that supports the building of community research infrastructure by exposing future professionals in the life sciences to community health issues, the role of research in addressing community health issues, and community-engaged research methods. The overall goal of the MIOS program is to deliver foundational research knowledge with a concentration on behavioral and health disparities science to support student engagement in community outreach and research activities. For example, students engage in health promotion activities in community settings and simultaneously recruit participants to take surveys or enroll in intervention projects. The program also offers activities for leadership, communication, and general professional skill development. Scholars are recruited throughout Mississippi and are required to be state residents and enrolled in a university/college. Scholars receive a monetary award and commit to work a defined schedule each week in the Telenutrition Center over 10 wk, culminating in a research product that is presented at state, regional, and national conferences. The program was first launched in the summer of 2019, and scholars completed the program in a face-to-face form housed at USM with the Mississippi INBRE Telenutrition Center. However, with the 2020 cohort, program faculty and staff were challenged to rethink the program delivery format amidst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and made the decision to offer a virtual community outreach and research experience. The purpose of this article is to describe the adaptation of the face-to-face program to a fully online summer community-based participatory research program for college students in the state of Mississippi. This article also presents program evaluation data reporting students’ perceptions of program benefits, expectations for the program, and confidence in research-related skills.

METHODS

Original Program Design Overview

MIOS is a 10-wk research program including community outreach and research components that was adapted from a predominantly face-to-face delivery model to a fully online program for the first time in the summer of 2020. The original program used a cohort model that was supported by two faculty members and three research staff members (1 full-time professional position and 2 part-time student positions). The program began with a 1-wk orientation that provided students with foundational knowledge and training to begin the program. Throughout the remaining 9 wk, scholars spent ∼40 h per week engaged in training, workshops, and activities that supported the outreach and research components. Scholars worked collectively in teams of four to eight on outreach activities and in teams of two to accomplish the research component. All human subjects research that scholars engaged in was approved by the USM Institutional Review Board (IRB). The protocol for collecting program evaluation data from scholars was also reviewed by the USM IRB and received an “exempt” status.

Face-to-Face Outreach and Research Components

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the outreach component entailed physically attending and participating in community events to conduct nutrition-, physical activity-, and health-related education outreach. Community events included health fairs in outpatient clinic or university settings and community fairs. The outreach components fostered community relationship building and colearning among students and community members related to community-engaged health-related education and research. For example, one outreach theme included low-sugar beverages, where information was delivered to share the amount of sugar in common beverages, a sample was provided for low-sugar beverage options, and giveaway incentives (for example, pens, lip balm) were offered to community members for participation in the outreach activities. Another outreach activity included the use of a plinking board, where community members had to answer a trivia question about fruits and vegetables to earn a disk to place in the board and win the prize corresponding with the slot that the disk landed in.

The research component included a cross-sectional study that scholars developed and implemented as a two-scholar team over the course of the program. As students conducted outreach events in the community, they simultaneously recruited participants to complete an electronic/paper questionnaire. Participants who completed the questionnaire were offered a giveaway incentive (such as a water bottle with cooling towel) and/or an entry into a prize drawing. The participant recruitment and data collection experience of the research component was intertwined with outreach activities. Scholars received foundational information about their research during the initial orientation week, followed by several workshops to facilitate the various steps of the research process, including but not limited to literature search and article assessment, data analysis techniques, and poster development. Table 1 contains further details about the MIOS research component curriculum.

Table 1.

Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars curriculum overview of the 10-wk program

Timeline	Research Component	Workshops and Activities
		2019 Outreach Component	2020 Outreach Component	Development Component
Orientation	Foundational topics presentations, CITI trainings			Cultural Competence, Time-Task Management, Virtual Work Etiquette
Week 1	Literature Search, Article Analysis	Introduction to Outreach Activities	Social Marketing Basics	Virtual Communication Etiquette, Journal Club, Virtual Background Team Building Activity
Week 2	Research Question, Hypothesis and Objectives, Introducing Your Research	Developing Outreach Activity Themes	Introduction to Social Marketing, Social Marketing Objective	Strategic Thinking, Journal Club, Pass the Word Team Building Activity
Week 3	Writing Your Methods, Community Voices Training and Stakeholder Interviews	Preparing Outreach Activity Kits	Developing Visual Campaigns, Introduction to Social Media Strategy, Mobile Apps for Photo and Video, Social Marketing Development Plan	Confronting Bias: Thriving Across Our Differences, Mute/Unmute Team Building Activity
Week 4	Getting to Know Your Variables, Abstract and Conference Poster Layout, Which Statistical Test is Right for You?, Getting Around in SPSS, Community Voices Stakeholder Interviews	Outreach Activity Training for Culturally Competent Encounters	Social Marketing Implementation Plan	Time Management, Would you rather…? Team Building Activity, Research Presentations I
Week 5	Data Analysis, Draft Abstract and Conference Poster Layout, Raw Results, Community Voices Stakeholder Interview Transcription	Outreach Event		Communication Skills, This or That Team Building Activity, Social Marketing Presentations
Week 6	Assessment of My Findings, Communicate My Findings to Professionals	Outreach Event	Final Social Marketing Products, 14-day Social Marketing Campaign Implementation	Learning Styles/Growth Mindset, Scavenger Hunt Team Building Activity, Research Presentations II
Week 7	Communicating My Findings to the Public, Conference Poster Draft	Outreach Event	Community Poster Draft, 14-day Social Marketing Campaign Implementation	Stress Management and Meditation, Blind Origami Team Building Activity, Resume and Cover Letter, Research Presentations III
Week 8	Poster Presentations in a Conference, Final Abstract, Final Conference Poster	Outreach Event	Final Community Poster	Preparing for Interviews and Elevator Speeches for Networking, Research Presentations IV (90-s pitch), Social Marketing Presentations II
Week 9	Practice and Preparation for Telenutrition Center Virtual Symposium and Mississippi INBRE Virtual Scholars Conference

Adapted Outreach and Research Components

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic presented limitations for the MIOS program, including the inability to engage scholars face to face with community members, program staff, and mentors. Thus, it was decided to adapt the program to a fully online format. Four key concerns were identified early on that drove the program adaptations for the online format.

First, we wanted to ensure that we provided an ample opportunity for mentorship of the scholars. In the face-to-face version, faculty, staff, and scholars were housed in one location on the research campus where everyone was easily accessible to one another for impromptu mentorship opportunities outside of planned activities. Thus, we created intentional mentorship opportunities. Scholars were assigned into groups of four to six (referred to as mentor groups), and each group was assigned to one mentor, a research staff member familiar with the research process. Mentors met with their groups for 90 min twice per week to coach students through the research and outreach activities assigned for the week.

Second, since community engagement is central to the mission of the program, we needed to identify a method for scholars to engage community members in a safe and socially isolated manner during the COVID-19 pandemic. A social media marketing campaign was designed as a virtual substitute for the community outreach component. The goal of the social media marketing campaign was to promote healthy lifestyle behaviors among Mississippians and Louisianians to address preventable chronic diseases, health disparities, and COVID-19. Each of the mentor groups was assigned to one community partner. Our community partners for the 2020 summer program were the Choctaw Health Center Diabetes Program, the United Houma Nation Wellness Center, the Hattiesburg Clinic Diabetes Program, and the Mississippi INBRE Telenutrition Center Move & Eat 2 Live Program. Scholars developed social marketing materials, tested them with community partners and stakeholders, and implemented a 14-day campaign including social media posts to address the needs of their community partner and the overall goal of the campaign. Scholars participated in several workshops and activities to support the development, implementation, and evaluation of their social media marketing campaigns. Table 1 contains a more detailed overview of workshops and activities for the outreach component.

Third, we wanted to make sure that the online environment fostered relationships, community building, and professionalism among our scholars similar to the face-to-face program. In the face-to-face environment, scholars naturally coalesced and enjoyed social activities together at opportunistic times (such as breaks/mealtimes, outreach events, or after work hours) and experienced inherent opportunities to develop professionalism. Those opportunities were created in the online format through weekly activities that included morning recaps to provide a progression overview for the program, team building workshops to engage scholars in fun activities to create community, multiple presentation opportunities to develop communication skills, and professional development, cultural competence, and leadership workshops to address key issues relevant to team and independent work in the academic and professional environments. Table 1 describes the different activities and workshops to address various areas of scholar development components. Each day also had a theme that guided an activity that was introduced during morning recap. Daily themes included Motivational Monday, sharing motivational quotes; Trivia Tuesday, playing trivia games; Way Back Wednesday, sharing pictures from the past of self and family with the team; Think about it Thursday, short discussions on situational questions; and Flexible Fridays, physical activity that can be accomplished at a desk.

Last but certainly not least, we needed to make sure that the outreach and research components remained integrated while also being able to collect enough data from populations of interest while remaining socially isolated from the community. In the face-to-face model, scholars collected data from willing participants when engaged in outreach activities, which we have found very effective. This method was used in combination with an electronic survey version. For example, at only two distinct community events, 2019 summer scholars collected survey data from nearly 400 participants. In the adapted online format, scholars shared an electronic survey using their own social media resources as well as that of their community partners. Survey data collection was only conducted with electronic means in 2020 but was a mix of paper and electronic methods in 2019. Each mentor group competed for the most participants recruited and ensured there was adequate representation of the populations of interest to the community partners. The survey data were used to create a data set for each mentor group, and each data set was distinguished by the community partners’ population of interest (for example, South Mississippians or Native Americans residing in Louisiana), if applicable. Within each mentor group, students were grouped into pairs (referred to as research teams) and selected a research question to complete the research component of the program. The 2019 group freely developed their research topics based on broad topics that were randomly drawn by each team. To reduce the complexity of and focus the research component for the online 2020 cohort, each mentor group was presented with the same original set of research questions for research teams to select their guiding question from. All scholars tailored their research question to their population and further refined it based on information gathered from the literature review and available to them from the survey data collection. Descriptive information from the 2020 surveys was also used to guide the development of the social media marketing campaign. Finally, since the online cohort could not observe and learn from the target populations through face-to-face outreach events, 2020 scholars conducted stakeholder interviews with two community members to explore benefits, barriers, and opportunities related to nutrition, physical activity, and health and inform their research. Scholars completed various workshops and activities, as described in Table 1, to support the completion of the research component, which resulted in the development of a conference abstract, a conference poster, and a community poster. The conference abstract and poster were submitted for presentation at professional conferences. The community posters were shared on social media to disseminate findings to the broader lay community.

Program Evaluation

MIOS was evaluated by both qualitative and quantitative methods. Scholars voluntarily completed two separate surveys with no incentives for completion. The first survey was collected at the end of the program and included open-ended questions that asked students about their favorite program memory, personal growth as a result of participating in the program, including challenges and weaknesses overcome, and the program contribution to the achievement of academic/professional goals (specific questions are listed in Table 2). The 2019 group completed a paper form, whereas the 2020 group completed an electronic form. Most of the second survey was first implemented in 2020 and collected during orientation week and after completion of the program. The second survey was a largely quantitative tool that assessed demographics, student expectations of the research program, level of confidence in ability to perform research-related tasks, and program satisfaction. The 2019 scholars did not complete questions related to student expectations of the research program, level of confidence in ability to perform research-related tasks, and program satisfaction.

Table 2.

Themes and example responses for three open-ended questions to evaluate the MIOS experience

Questions	2019 MIOS Quantitative Evaluation Data		2020 MIOS Quantitative Evaluation Data
	Themes	Response Examples	Themes	Response Examples
Tell us about your favorite memory from the program.	Outreach Activities	When I was involved in handing out surveys at the mini health fair	Activities	Scavenger hunt and “getting to know you” activities
	Social Networking	Getting to know all of the scholars and becoming good friends with them	Zoom bloopers	Funny Zoom disruptions
			Social networking	Making new friends and building relationships
Describe your personal growth as a result of participating in this program. For example, consider a challenge or weakness that you overcame.	Technical Skills	How to do research and create a poster and abstract	Technical skills	Learning cultural awareness, leadership, and statistics skills.
	Communication Skills	Talk and work with others to build relationships and being more open	Communication skills	Working with others and becoming more outspoken
	Resilience	Overcoming confrontation, insecurities, and anxiety	Resilience	Overcoming obstacles and stepping out of comfort zone
How did this program contribute to the achievement of your academic or professional goals?	Career preparation	Prepared for working with a partner and as a team of people with different backgrounds	Career preparation	Prepared for future in research and academics and built connections and cultural awareness
	Technical and communication skill building	Learned how to conduct research and present findings	Technical and communication skill building	Learned research and social marketing skills

Demographics.

Demographic data included sex, race/ethnicity, academic classification, and collegiate institution type attending. We also collected information about prior research experience including number of prior research experiences, how many times students had presented research at a conference, symposium, event, or exhibition, and research area of the previous experience. Students were also asked what advanced degree(s) as well as type of job they considered pursuing, but only in the 2020 survey.

Program expectations.

Student research experience expectations were collected with 13 items measured on a Likert scale of agreement from 1 to 7, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 7 being “strongly agree.” Sample expectations included “to be challenging and fun,” “to help me understand how to do research,” and “to give me a better understanding of health issues in my community.” Students responded to what their expectations were during orientation week and were presented with the same items again during the last week of the program to respond to whether those expectations were met.

Research task confidence.

Research task confidence was assessed with 19 items measured on a Likert confidence scale from 1 to 7, with 1 being “not at all confident” and 7 being “extremely confident.” At the beginning and end of the program, students ranked their perceived confidence in various research-related tasks including “to formulate a research hypothesis,” “to collect research data,” and “to discuss research with a general audience.”

Data Analysis

The first survey was analyzed by using thematic content analysis (3) to determine response themes for each question. Two research assistants initially reviewed and coded the data and subsequently reconciled the two reports to one report. All data coding and themes were reviewed and finalized by a senior researcher. The next survey was analyzed with IBM SPSS Statistics 27.0 software. Frequencies and descriptives were computed for demographic data as well as student expectations of the research program, level of confidence in ability to perform research-related tasks, and program satisfaction. Multiple t tests with significance set at α < 0.01 were conducted to determine pre-post differences. A more conservative α level was chosen to provide some control over Type I error with the understanding that results are already somewhat conservative because of considerable skew on the items, as evidenced by means on all items related to program expectations and task confidence >4.2 on a 1 to 7 scale and averages on 26 of the 32 items >5. Item skew has long been known to reduce interitem correlations and result in more conservative tests of significance (4, 5).

RESULTS

Nineteen scholars were enrolled in MIOS during the summer of 2019 and experienced the face-to-face program before the pandemic. The 2019 group was equally male and female, with diverse race/ethnicity and academic classifications. Half had no prior research experience, and another third had minimal prior experience. Twenty scholars were enrolled in MIOS during the summer of 2020 and experienced the adapted program during the COVID-19 pandemic. More than two-thirds were female (n = 14, 70%), and racial/ethnic backgrounds and academic classification were diverse, with the greatest number of scholars at the junior level. Most scholars had no prior research experience or undergraduate research presentations at the start of the program. Table 3 provides demographic data in detail. The 2020 scholars represented various life sciences (i.e., nursing, psychology, kinesiology, nutrition), and most (n = 17, 85%) scholars were interested in pursuing an advanced degree (MD/DO, MS, or PhD) and about half (n = 11, 55%) were interested in possibly entering fields of academia, industrial/clinical research, or the medical profession (data not shown and was not available for 2019 scholars).

Table 3.

Demographic data describing Mississippi INBRE Outreach Scholars enrolled during summers 2019 and 2020

Variables	Responses	% (n)
		MIOS 2019 (n = 19)	MIOS 2020 (n = 20)
Sex	Male	47 (9)	30 (6)
	Female	53 (10)	70 (14)
Race/ethnicity	White	42 (8)	15 (3)
	Native American	21 (4)	40 (8)
	Black	26 (5)	30 (6)
	Asian	5 (1)	5 (1)
	Biracial: Native American and Black	0 (0)	10 (2)
	Biracial: Native American and White	5 (1)	0 (0)
Academic classification	Freshman	11 (2)	15 (3)
	Sophomore	11 (2)	5 (1)
	Junior	26 (5)	40 (8)
	Senior	21 (4)	25 (5)
	Master’s	31 (6)	15 (3)
Prior research experience	No, I have not had a prior research experience.	55 (10)	75 (15)
	Yes, during 1 academic semester (typically ∼10 h/wk).	28 (5)	5 (1)
	Yes, during multiple academic semesters (typically ∼10 h/wk).	17 (3)	5 (1)
	Yes, during a prior academic semester (or semesters) and a summer.	0 (0)	5 (1)
	Yes, during prior years and/or several summers.	0 (0)	10 (2)
Undergraduate research presentations	0 presentations	Not collected	85 (17)
	1		5 (1)
	2		5 (1)
	5+		5 (1)

Table 2 details themes and example responses for the qualitative postprogram evaluation. Activities (i.e., team building activities), Zoom bloopers (i.e., mistakes or interruptions made during virtual meetings), and social networking (i.e., building relationships with scholars and mentors) were the most common themes reported as scholars’ favorite memory from the program. Scholars described their personal growth because of participating in this program in the areas of technical skill building (i.e., developing research posters, learning cultural awareness, or building statistical/leadership skills), communication skills (i.e., public speaking), and resilience (i.e., learning to overcome obstacle or staying focused). Finally, scholars reported that the program contributed to the achievement of their academic or professional goals by providing career preparation (i.e., for a future in academics or research) and technical/communication skill building (i.e., learning research skills and social marketing campaign development) opportunities. Responses were similar between 2019 and 2020 scholars.

Table 4 details the 2020 scholars’ program expectations before and after completing the MIOS program. There were no significant differences in program expectations before and after MIOS summer research program completion. Mean [standard deviation (SD)] data are presented in Table 4 with a numbered list of items. Eighty-five percent to 100% of scholars moderately to strongly agreed with expectation items 1–5, 8, and 10–12. Only 75% and 60% moderately to strongly agreed with items 6 and 7 before the program, which increased to 90% and 85% after the program, respectively. Items 9 and 10 decreased from 75% and 85%, respectively, to 65% of scholars who moderately to strongly agreed with both statements.

Table 4.

A comparison of Outreach Scholars’ program expectations before and after completing the MIOS summer research program

Expectations Agreement Items*	Pre Expectations Agreement Mean (SD)	Post Met Expectations Agreement Mean (SD)	P Value
1. … challenging and fun.	6.65 (0.59)	6.50 (0.51)	0.59
2. … professional academic mentorship.	6.70 (0.47)	6.65 (0.75)	0.47
3. … help/-ed me better understand how to do research.	6.80 (0.52)	6.65 (0.59)	0.52
4. … help/-ed me better understand how to use statistics.	6.60 (0.75)	5.95 (1.00)	0.75
5. … teach/taught me about several major research approaches.	6.50 (0.76)	6.25 (1.29)	0.76
6. … encourage/-d me to pursue my own interests.	6.30 (0.98)	6.50 (0.69)	0.98
7. … connect/-ed me with students like myself.	5.75 (1.48)	6.25 (1.12)	1.48
8. … connect/-ed me to academic faculty/staff who are helpful.	6.50 (0.69)	6.75 (0.44)	0.69
9. … improve/-d my study skills.	6.35 (0.99)	5.45 (1.73)	0.99
10. … improve/-d my leadership skills.	6.50 (0.89)	5.80 (1.28)	0.89
11. … give/gave me a better understanding of health issues in my community.	6.80 (0.52)	6.60 (0.75)	0.52
12. … give/gave me the chance to gain exposure to research literature in my field.	6.45 (1.00)	6.55 (0.76)	1.00
13. … give/gave me the chance to explore whether research and graduate school may be the right path for me.	6.45 (0.95)	6.05 (1.61)	0.95

*Sentence stems for pre expectations agreement items were “I expect my Mississippi INBRE virtual research experience to…” and for post expectations agreement items were “My Mississippi INBRE virtual research experience…”. Likert scale was a 7-point agreement scale with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 7 being “strongly agree.”

Table 5 contains pre and post item means, standard deviations, paired-samples t tests, and confidence intervals for pre-post differences on the 19 listed and numbered confidence items measured before and after completion of the 2020 MIOS summer research program. Confidence levels increased between pre and post measures on items 1, 2, and 12–14, with an increase of 25% to 65% of scholars reporting that they were very to extremely confident on the postcompletion compared with precompletion item responses. An increase of at least 25% of scholars pre compared with post measures reported that they were very to extremely confident for items 7, 9–11, and 15–18 (all P values > 0.01).

Table 5.

Comparison of Outreach Scholars’ confidence levels in various research-related tasks/skills before and after completing the MIOS summer research program

Confidence Items*	Pre Confidence Mean (SD)	Post Confidence Mean (SD)	Post − Pre Difference (CI)	P value
1. … Locate primary research literature in biomedical/health-related field (e.g., journal articles)…	4.80 (1.54)	6.15 (0.88)	1.35 (0.62, 2.08)	0.001
2. … Understand primary research literature in biomedical/health-related field…	4.70 (1.56)	5.8 (0.89)	1.10 (0.31, 1.89)	0.009
3. … Work effectively with others to investigate a research problem…	5.90 (0.85)	6.15 (0.99)	0.25 (−0.25, 0.75)	0.31
4. … Work effectively on my own…	5.75 (1.33)	6.05 (1.15)	0.30 (−0.31, 0.91)	0.32
5. … Manage my time effectively…	5.85 (1.27)	6.15 (0.99)	0.30 (−0.33, 0.93)	0.33
6. … Work through obstacles or challenges…	5.85 (0.93)	6.20 (0.89)	0.35 (0.08, 0.63)	0.02
7. … Formulate a research hypothesis…	5.30 (1.34)	6.05 (1.23)	0.75 (0.04, 1.46)	0.04
8. … Design a methods approach to test your research question…	5.15 (1.39)	5.35 (1.46)	0.20 (−0.76, 1.16)	0.67
9. … Collect research data…	5.70 (1.17)	5.85 (1.27)	0.15 (−0.67, 0.97)	0.71
10. … Do statistical analysis of research data…	4.20 (1.36)	4.80 (1.61)	0.60 (−0.12, 1.32)	0.10
11. … Interpret research data…	5.00 (1.30)	5.35 (1.57)	0.35 (−0.63, 1.33)	0.46
12. … Write a research abstract…	4.40 (1.64)	5.80 (1.36)	1.22 (0.38, 2.07)	0.007
13. … Create a research poster…	4.90 (1.37)	6.30 (0.98)	1.40 (0.62, 2.18)	0.001
14. … Give an oral research presentation…	4.60 (1.47)	6.15 (1.10)	1.55 (0.54, 2.56)	0.005
15. … Properly reference information obtained from another research source to avoid plagiarism…	5.25 (1.02)	6.05 (1.15)	0.80 (0.08, 1.52)	0.03
16. … Communicate technical information to people within my discipline…	5.35 (1.14)	5.90 (1.21)	0.55 (−0.29, 1.39)	0.19
17. … Communicate technical information to people outside my discipline…	5.15 (1.42)	5.90 (1.12)	0.75 (−0.12, 1.62)	0.09
18. … Discuss research with a general audience who are not scientists/researchers…	5.25 (1.48)	6.00 (1.30)	0.75 (−0.08, 1.58)	0.07
19. … Develop a professional network…	5.60 (1.31)	5.60 (1.47)	0.00 (−0.85, 0.85)

^*Pre confidence items were stated as “My confidence … before the Mississippi INBRE Virtual Research Experience.” Post confidence items were stated as “My confidence … after the Mississippi INBRE Virtual Research Experience.” Likert scale was a 7-point confidence scale with 1 being “Not at all confident” and 7 being “Extremely confident.” CI, confidence interval.

Table 6 details the project topics as examples of the types of life sciences/biomedical research topics that were developed, finalized, and submitted for presentation by both groups of scholars.

Table 6.

Examples of life sciences and biomedical research project topics completed by 2019 and 2020 scholars

MIOS 2019 Abstracts

1. Factors That Influence Interest in Nutrition Counseling in a Sample of Mississippi Adults

2. The Impact of Self-Efficacy for Diet on Fruits and Vegetables Intake among Young Adults in Mississippi

3. The Relationship between Mobile Health Application Use and Perceived Health Improvement of Mississippi Adults

4. Examining the Relationships between Where Mississippian Minorities Prefer to Receive Their Health, Nutrition, and Physical Activity Information and Their Stage of Change for Diet and Physical Activity

5. The Relationship between Access to Built Environment Infrastructure and Physical Activity in African American Adults from Mississippi

6. How Perceived Social and Emotional Support Impacts Healthy Dietary Behaviors among Adults in Mississippi.

7. The Daily Bread: Examining the Relationship between Church Attendance and Dietary Behaviors in Mississippi Adults

8. Examining the Relationship between Chronic Disease Status and the Use of Mobile Health Apps Among Younger vs. Older Adult Residents of Mississippi

9. From the Mirror to the Mind: Are Race and Gender Moderators of the Relationship Between Mental Health and Body Image Disparity?

10. Relation of Physical Activity to Current Body Weight in Young to Middle Aged Adults in Mississippi

MIOS 2020 Abstracts

11. Diet, Physical Activity, and Preventable Diseases: Examining the Relationship between Community Cultural Values and Health Behaviors among Louisiana Native Americans

12. Bound by History: Fatalistic Views, Family Medical History, and Chronic Diseases within Southeastern Native Americans

13. Investigating the Relationship between Chronic Diseases and COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors among African Americans in Mississippi

14. Cultural Values of Diet, Physical Activity, and Preventable Diseases Influence on Diet and Physical Activity Behaviors Among African Americans

15. Family Medical History of Diabetes and Fatalistic Views of Healthy Lifestyle Behaviors among South Mississippians

16. Cultural Values, Social Support and the relation to Physical Activity Behaviors among Southeastern Native American Tribes in Mississippi

17. Fatalistic Views in Relation to Diet, Physical Activity, and Preventable Diseases among Louisiana Natives with a Lesser or Greater Medical History

18. COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors & Chronic Disease Status among Southeastern Native Americans in Mississippi

19. The Relationship between Cultural Perceptions of Health Topics and Health Behaviors among Southern Mississippians

20. Comparing Preventative Behaviors for COVID-19 among Individuals with and without Diabetes in South Mississippi

DISCUSSION

Overall, the MIOS program that was adapted to the online environment amidst the COVID-19 pandemic was well perceived by scholars. The 2020 cohort was a diverse body of scholars in the life sciences composed mostly of minority students, including Black and Native American Mississippians. MIOS was the first research experience for many scholars, since most reported no prior research experience or participation in research presentations. The program generally met scholars’ expectations of the program and improved their confidence and contributed to their growth in various communication and technical skills and prepared them for their future careers.

The program expectations items were asked before scholars began and after completion of the MIOS program. The insignificant difference between pre and post expectations indicated that scholars’ a priori expectations for the program were generally met by the end of the program. The overwhelming majority of scholars had no undergraduate research experiences or presentations before the start of the research program. Thus, this program successfully exposed a diverse body of college students to research in life sciences and biomedical-related fields. Because of the dearth of previous research exposure, it is noteworthy that prior expectations may be biased by introducing those expectations to scholars before the program. This phenomenon is synonymous with the “observer effect,” which is a key consideration of Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty (6). A future approach that may resolve this issue would be to ask open-ended questions before the program, similar to the qualitative questions that were asked after program completion. Qualitative approaches are known to complement quantitative approaches with more robust data (7). We have shown a feasible method to collect qualitative data to accompany our quantitative information.

Confidence in various research-related tasks/skills increased significantly after the program, and confidence across all measures improved to some extent, except for confidence to develop a professional network, which remained the same. Although these findings bode well for the program, it should be noted that a scholar’s perceived confidence to execute a task/skill does not necessarily translate to competence. Gross and Latham (8) have defined overconfidence as a behavior in the learning process during which a student judges their competencies higher than actual observed performance, which was a concept supported by Molteni and Chan (9). On the contrary, Kruger and Dunning (10) have noted that highly competent individuals understand when tasks are complex and will systematically underestimate their own proficiencies. Although confidence is a complex construct that should be interpreted with caution, our results might at least suggest that most scholars felt better about executing the research tasks after completion of the program.

The creation of community scientists is integral to building research infrastructure by fostering community familiarity with and trust in research. It is particularly crucial to engage minority populations in research to meet goals to increase diversity in science (11) and representation of minorities in clinical trials (12). The analyses presented here demonstrate that a mixed-method analysis is useful for examining the extent to which programs such as Mississippi INBRE are meeting goals of providing a rich research experience in health disparities for a diverse student body. Future longitudinal data may be examined to explore the long-term impact of MIOS on career preparation and choices.

GRANTS

This work was supported by the Mississippi INBRE, funded by an Institutional Development Award (IDeA) from National Institute of General Medical Sciences Grant P20GM103476.

DISCLOSURES

No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the authors.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

J.L.L. conceived and designed research; T.G. analyzed data; J.L.L. interpreted results of experiments; J.L.L. and T.G. prepared figures; J.L.L. and S.A. drafted manuscript; J.L.L., T.G., S.A., C.I., D.W., T.D., F.L.H., J.G., M.O.E., M.M., and J.R.-S. edited and revised manuscript; J.L.L., T.G., S.A., C.I., D.W., T.D., F.L.H., J.G., M.O.E., M.M., and J.R.-S. approved final version of manuscript.