[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/cts.2025.10178.].

Background Most individuals with metastatic cancer experience pain at some point in their illness trajectory that is managed with opioid therapy.(1,2) Yet, there is a paucity of data on opioid benefits and harms. (3,4) Objective We completed baseline assessments of a prospective longitudinal cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer that aims to assess opioid benefits and harms through repeated quantitative measures. Methods Participants with advanced cancer were recruited from four oncology programs in the US; those with preexisting long-term opioid use (> 3 months) were excluded. Metastatic cancer diagnosis was confirmed in the medical record and demographics, and short-duration opioid (< 3 months) use were self-reported. Validated pain (PEG score) and substance use (TAPS) measures were collected via RedCap. We summarized continuous data as medians and categorical data as counts and percentages. Differences in PEG by short-duration opioid use were tested with the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Results Of the 490 participants in the baseline analysis over half were male (272, 56%). The median age was 67 (IQR 59-74), and the most common cancer diagnoses were digestive (171, 35.4%) and thoracic (79, 16.4%). The majority of participants had non-cancer multimorbidity (282, 57.9%). Sixty-six participants (13.5%) reported recent cannabis use and two hundred and nine (43.5%) reported recent alcohol use. Less than half (184, 37.9%) were prescribed short-duration opioids. PEG scores were significantly higher in participants prescribed opioids in the past 3 months (median 3.7; IQR 1.0-5.7) vs. those who were not (median 0.7; IQR 0.0-2.7; p< 0.001). Conclusion We recruited 490 individuals with new metastatic cancer for this multicenter longitudinal prospective cohort study. Most participants were older with multimorbidity and active substance use. Short-duration opioid use was associated with higher baseline pain scores. This may indicate a lack of opioid effectiveness early on or confounding by indication.

BackgroundDiversity on biomedical research teams may lead to higher quality research, but some groups remain under-represented (UR) on research teams. Evaluating the challenges that UR scholars in the health sciences face could inform policies that institutions could take to recruit and retain UR scholars.ObjectiveWe used a large qualitative dataset to examine challenges in pursuing and persisting in research careers among UR postdoctoral and early-career faculty scholars participating in a randomized controlled trial.DesignWe conducted 78 individual qualitative interviews. Most participants held MDs or PhDs and were Black, Hispanic, or biracial. Interviews used a semi-structured guide and were audio-recorded and transcribed. A team of investigators developed an initial codebook based on a subset of interviews, which was iteratively revised by the team. After a final codebook was agreed upon, codes were assigned to all data. Codes were grouped into themes and sub-themes, which were discussed by the team. We present key themes and illustrative quotes.Key ResultsCareer challenges reported by UR scholars came from the culture of academia as well as from external factors. Academia culture challenges included demand for productivity and funding, bias and racism, competition and hierarchy, and the "secret rules" to the system. External challenges included financial stress, being an immigrant, and family demands. Responses to challenges could be positive, including making a career pivot, building resilience, finding one's community, or finding one's passion. Negative consequences to challenges included burnout, imposter syndrome, and low belongingness.ConclusionsChallenges faced by UR scholars can be both internal and external to the academy and can induce negative consequences among UR scholars, but some scholars also build resilience and find passion in the face of these challenges. Efforts to improve the culture of academia and to foster positive mentoring could help retain UR scholars in biomedical science.

CONTEXT:Patients with advanced cancer are living longer, which can impact pain trajectories and management approaches. Opioids are commonly used to treat pain in these patients, yet there is limited data on current opioid management in this population. OBJECTIVE:We present baseline data from a prospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. METHODS:Participants with a confirmed new diagnosis of advanced cancer and no history of long-term opioid use were recruited from five US oncology programs. Demographic information and validated patient-reported measures for pain (PEG score), comorbidities, and substance use measures were collected. We conducted descriptive statistics and assessed differences in PEG by short-duration opioid use with the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. RESULTS:Of the 490 participants in the baseline analysis, median age was 67 years. Most participants identified as male (56%) and White (79%); digestive cancer was most common (35%). Most participants (58%) reported at least one non-cancer comorbidity. Approximately, 30% reported no pain, 36% reported mild pain, 22% reported moderate pain, and 12% reported severe pain. The PEG score was higher (P < 0.001) in those who used opioids in the past 3 months. Approximately, one-third (38%) of individuals reported recent short-term prescription opioid use. High-risk substance use was reported for alcohol (62% lifetime and 9% within the past 3 months) and, to a lesser extent, tobacco and cannabis. CONCLUSION:Older age, comorbidities, and substance use patterns noted in this population can impact pain trajectories and opioid safety.

Introduction:To successfully recruit and retain faculty members from underrepresented backgrounds (URBs), we need to understand the factors that attract them to research careers in the first place. However, scholarship in this area has focused largely on students who are contemplating research careers rather than faculty members who are currently in such careers. Methods:This study explores the career motivations of early-career health researchers (faculty members and postdoctoral fellows) from URBs. It was conducted as part of a cluster randomized trial across 25 academic institutions investigating a support intervention. We conducted 1-hour semi-structured qualitative interviews with scholars from URBs in both the intervention and control arms of the trial. To our knowledge, this is the largest qualitative study of early-career faculty members from URBs to date. Results:Seventy-eight individuals were interviewed. Our analysis revealed six key themes pertinent to participants' motivations to pursue research careers: (1) love of science; (2) making a larger impact; (3) happenstance and economic considerations; (4) family, community, and a path out of poverty; (5) the role of mentors and role models; and (6) support programs for scholars from URBs. Conclusions:Our results align with prior studies while offering new insights into the motivations of URB faculty members in research careers. These insights can and should inform the design of programs to both recruit and retain URM faculty members in research careers.

PURPOSE:Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), including discrimination, are known risk factors for negative outcomes later in life. Recently, sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI)-based discrimination was recognized as an ACE. However, its association with health outcomes among youth remains understudied. We aim to identify socio-demographic characteristics associated with caregiver-reported SOGI-based discrimination and assess the association of SOGI-based discrimination with youth health outcomes. METHODS:We analyzed 2020-2022 National Survey of Children's Health data on youth who are 6-17 years old (n = 91,093), whose caregivers answered the question on SOGI-based discrimination. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models to identify socio-demographic characteristics associated with SOGI-based discrimination and the association between SOGI-based discrimination and adverse health outcomes. RESULTS:Two percent of youth (n = 1,834) experienced SOGI-based discrimination, with significantly higher odds among adolescents (aOR = 4.29, 95% CI = 3.35, 5.51), females (aOR = 2.67, 95% CI = 2.18, 3.28), non-Hispanic multiracial (aOR = 1.42, 95% CI-1.09, 1.86), and youth in English-speaking households (aOR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.32, 4.37). SOGI-based discrimination was significantly associated with poorer health (aOR = 3.27, 95% CI = 2.09, 5.13), ≥1 chronic health conditions (aOR = 3.35, 95% CI = 2.39, 4.35), and having special health care needs (aOR = 3.81, 95% CI = 3.10, 4.68). This significance persisted after adjusting for socio-demographics and other ACEs. DISCUSSION:Our study quantitatively links SOGI-based discrimination with adverse health outcomes and identifies youth with higher odds of SOGI-based discrimination. These results underscore the importance of addressing SOGI-based discrimination when treating youth who may be at risk.

Introduction:Scientific teams that are comprised of different types of researchers have higher research productivity, and there is a need for evidence-based methods to improve the biomedical research workforce. Building Up a Biomedical Research Workforce (Building Up) was a multi-center, cluster-randomized, unblinded controlled trial with one intervention arm and one control arm, conducted at 25 United States academic medical centers. The authors tested the hypothesis that participants from backgrounds underrepresented in science who are randomized to the intervention will have greater numbers of peer-reviewed publications and increased Psychological Capital, compared to the control group. Methods:The study included a 10-month intervention period and follow-up assessments occurring one, two, and three years after the intervention began. The intervention arm received a 10-month intervention with monthly meetings, near-peer mentoring, networking opportunities, and grant- and scientific-writing coursework. Participants in the control arm experienced the usual forms of mentoring, networking, and coursework that their institutions provided. Results:Of the 220 participants who completed the pre-intervention assessment (98% of all enrolled participants), 71% completed the post-intervention assessment at year 1, 60% at year 2, and 66% at year 3. Individuals in the intervention arm had significantly higher levels of self-efficacy, resilience, and optimism in the three years following the start of the intervention, compared to the control arm. Discussion:This finding suggests that the Building Up intervention can increase participants' Psychological Capital.

Objective: We examined the change in pediatric primary care clinician attitudes and perceptions about telemedicine after one year of telemedicine use. Methods: We administered a survey to pediatric primary care clinicians across 50 primary care practices in Pennsylvania in 2020 and 2021. Surveys were linked using a combination of deterministic and probabilistic matching. We used McNemar's test to compare change in responses from 2020 to 2021. Results: Among pediatric primary care clinicians surveyed in 2020 and 2021 (n = 101), clinicians agreed that telemedicine could always or usually deliver high-quality care for mental health (80% in 2020 and 78% in 2021), care coordination (77% in 2020 and 70% in 2021), acute care (33% in 2020 and 34% in 2021), or preventive care (25% in 2020 and 18% in 2021) and this did not significantly change. Clinician perceptions of usability, while high, declined over time with fewer endorsing ease of use (93% in 2020 and 80% in 2021) and reliability (14% in 2020 and 0% in 2021) over time. Despite this, 62% of clinicians agreed that they were satisfied with their use of telemedicine at both time points. Respondents anticipated positive impact on equity and timeliness of care from telemedicine use but did not anticipate positive impact across child health, health care delivery, or clinician experience. Perceptions across these domains did not change over time. Conclusions: With one year of telemedicine experience, primary care clinicians maintained beliefs that telemedicine could deliver high-quality care for specific clinical needs but had worsening perceptions of usability over time.

Mentoring may act as a buffer for the negative impacts of racial trauma. Building Up (conducted 2020-2024) is a cluster-randomized trial at 25 institutions of postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty from underrepresented backgrounds. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify mentoring competencies associated with the impact of social unrest due to systemic racism. Eighty-two percent of participants (n=143) identified as female, 33% as non-Hispanic Black, and 36% as Hispanic. Mentoring that aligns expectations and mentoring that assesses understanding were significantly associated with social unrest due to systemic racism impacting ability to work (OR=2.84 and OR=0.52, respectively) and conduct research (OR=4.21 and OR=0.41, respectively). Future research should elucidate specific aspects of mentoring relationships that serve as a buffer during times of social unrest.

Objective:Researchers from underrepresented groups leave research positions at a disproportionate rate. We aim to identify factors associated with self-efficacy in career advancement and career commitment among underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty.Methods:Building Up is a cluster-randomized trial with 25 academic health institutions. In September-October 2020, 219 Building Up participants completed the pre-intervention assessment, which included questions on demographics, science identity, mentoring, self-efficacy in career advancement (i.e., advancement is open to me, confidence in career progression, confidence in overcoming professional barriers), and career commitment (i.e., intent to continue research training or studying in a field related to biomedical sciences). Using logistic and multinomial logistic regression, we identified characteristics independently associated with self-efficacy in career advancement and career commitment.Results:The cohort is 80% female, 33% non-Hispanic/Latinx Black, and 34% Hispanic/Latinx. Having mentors that address diversity was significantly associated with the belief that advancement is open to them (OR = 1.7). Higher science identity (OR = 4.0) and having mentors that foster independence (OR = 1.8) were significantly associated with confidence in career progression. Higher science identity was also significantly associated with confidence in overcoming professional barriers (OR = 2.3) and intent to continue studying in a field related to biomedical sciences (OR = 3.3). Higher age (OR = 2.3) and higher science identity (OR = 4.2) were significantly associated with intent to continue research training.Discussion:Science identity and mentoring play key roles in self-efficacy in career advancement and career commitment. These factors may contribute to retention of underrepresented early-career biomedical researchers.

BackgroundOpioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. However, the evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Patients with advanced cancer or cancer that is unlikely to be cured frequently experience pain. Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. Many individuals with advanced cancer are now living long enough to experience opioid-related harm. Emerging evidence from chronic noncancer pain literature suggests that longer-term opioid therapy may have limited benefits for pain and function, and opioid-related harms are also a major concern. However, whether these benefits and harms of opioids apply to patients with cancer-related pain is unknown. ObjectiveThis manuscript outlines the protocol for the “Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: The Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives (BEST) Study.” The study aims to better understand opioid decision-making in patients with advanced cancer, along with opioid benefits and harms, through prospective examination of patients’ pain experiences and opioid side effects and understanding the decision-making by patients, care partners, and clinicians. MethodsThis is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that aims to enroll 630 patients with advanced cancer, 20 care partners, and 20 clinicians (670 total participants). Patient participants must have an advanced solid cancer diagnosis, defined by the American Cancer Society as cancer that is unlikely to be cured. We will recruit patient participants within 12 weeks after diagnosis so that we can understand opioid benefits, harms, and perspectives on opioid decision-making throughout the course of their advanced cancer (up to 2 years). We will also specifically elicit information regarding long-term opioid use (ie, opioids for ≥90 consecutive days) and exclude patients on long-term opioid therapy before an advanced cancer diagnosis. Lived-experience perspectives related to opioid use in those with advanced cancer will be captured by qualitative interviews with a subset of patients, clinicians, and care partners. Our data collection will be grounded in a behavioral decision research approach that will allow us to develop future interventions to inform opioid-related decision-making for patients with metastatic cancer. ResultsData collection began in October 2022 and is anticipated to end by November 2024. ConclusionsUpon successful execution of our study protocol, we anticipate the development of a comprehensive evidence base on opioid therapy in individuals with advanced cancer guided by the behavioral decision research framework. The information gained from this study will be used to guide interventions to facilitate opioid decisions among patients, clinicians, and care partners. Given the limited evidence base about opioid therapy in people with cancer, we envision this study will have significant real-world implications for cancer-related pain management and opioid-related clinical decision-making. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/54953

Outcomes1. Understand the demographic, clinical characteristics, and pain severity of the participants enrolled into a prospective cohort study of opioid benefits and harms.2. Apply the evidence, recognize potential important harms and benefits to opioids for pain management in patients with advanced cancer.Key MessageThe evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Here, we present the baseline characteristics, particularly pain, substance use, and opioid prescribing, of a prospective cohort developed to investigate the benefits and harms of opioid prescribing in individuals with advanced cancer.ImportanceThere is limited evidence available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer.(1,2) For example, the risks with benzodiazepines co-prescribing, substance use, or overdose.Objective(s)To fill the urgently needed clinical and research gap on opioid benefits and harms in individuals with advanced cancer, we describe baseline cohort characteristics as of 10/13/2023.Scientific Methods UtilizedThis study is a multisite longitudinal cohort study using patient reported outcomes (PROs) (10/2022-present). Participants have a recent (within 12 weeks of enrollment) advanced cancer diagnosis and maximal opioid exposure of less than 90 consecutive days in the prior year. PRO measures include the Pain, Enjoyment, and General Activity (PEG scale).(3 ) Additionally, participants complete surveys on demographics, mortality risk and substance use history.ResultsA total of 154 participants completed baseline assessments. Cohort demographics include mean age 66 years; 42% were female; 79% identified as White, 12% Black, and 11% Hispanic. The most common cancers were prostate (19%), lung (16%), and pancreatic (12%). With a look back period of 3 months, 46% reported potentially problematic use of alcohol, 20% cannabis, and 1% prescription opioids. The mean PEG score on a 0 to 10 scale was 2.3 (SD=2.6). Thirty-six percent were prescribed opioids in the three months prior to enrollment. Fifty-two percent of participants had a low risk of two-year mortality.Conclusion(s)We have recruited 154 participants with advanced cancer and anticipate recruiting 630 participants by November 2024. The cohort reported mild pain severity, one-third were prescribed opioids at baseline and nearly half reported risky alcohol use. These rates mirror declining pain severity and opioid prescribing but indicate slightly higher substance use rates than recent literature. (4,5) Subsequent aims will investigate opioid benefits/harms and conduct qualitative interviews to understand opioid-related decision-making in patients, clinicians, and caregivers.ImpactSuccessful study completion will inform future interventions guiding opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer.

There have been numerous investigations of aberrant eating and substance abuse among patients who have undergone bariatric surgery, which affects the metabolism and the pharmacokinetics of alcohol. However, there is a dearth of literature considering the complex interplay between changes in post-surgery food and alcohol consumption. Furthermore, despite the increasing recognition of issues surrounding replacing food consumption with alcohol consumption (Food and Alcohol Disturbance [FAD]), most emerging research has focused on young adult populations. This perspective reviews and synthesizes the small but growing body of research on the interplay between food and alcohol consumption, particularly FAD, and considers its application to bariatric surgery in general. There are unique considerations for patients who have undergone bariatric surgery. Patients experience altered gastric anatomy, which affects food and alcohol metabolism, and are advised to abstain from drinking alcohol after surgery. After reviewing the available literature, this perspective highlights future directions for research and practice in bariatric surgery.

Objective:To identify factors associated with incident alcohol consumption, hazardous drinking, alcohol-related problems, and substance use up to 8 years following metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) during adolescence. Background:In this cohort, nearly half of those who underwent MBS as adolescents screened positive for alcohol use disorder, symptoms of alcohol-related harm, or alcohol-related problems within 8 years post-surgery. Moreover, persistent or heavy marijuana use following MBS during adolescence is higher than national data. Methods:This study includes 217 adolescents (aged 13-19 years) enrolled in a 5-center prospective cohort study who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or vertical sleeve gastrectomy between 2007 and 2011 and were followed for up to 8 years. Participants self-reported alcohol use via the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and substance use for up to 8 years. Results:Female sex, pre-surgery lower body mass index, and pre-surgery substance use were independently associated with increased risk of incident post-surgery hazardous drinking. Pre-surgery psychiatric counseling was significantly associated with increased risk for new-onset substance use post-surgery. Starting substance use post-surgery or continuing pre- to post-surgery was independently associated with a higher risk of post-surgery hazardous drinking. Greater percent weight loss, starting post-surgery or continuing pre- to post-surgery psychiatric counseling, using alcohol, and hazardous drinking were independently associated with a higher risk of post-surgery substance use. Conclusions:Future research with a nonsurgical control group should be examined to further elucidate the relationships between MBS and alcohol and substance use following surgery during adolescence.

Introduction:Early-stage clinical and translational researchers who set and track career goals, milestones, and progress are successful in career development. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the Customized Career Development Platform (CCDP), an online individual development plan (IDP), versus the traditional IDP template in improving research success and career satisfaction.Methods:We conducted a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial of 340 scholars and trainees at 27 US academic healthcare institutions. The primary outcome was number of published manuscripts 24 months post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included the number of grant proposals submitted and funded, job satisfaction, and level of communication with mentors. An analysis of CCDP participants assessed proficiency level for the 14 Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) competencies. Data were analyzed using intention-to-treat.Results:Participants were mostly female (60.3%) and Caucasian (67.2%); mean age was 34 years. Twenty-four months following the intervention, the CCDP versus traditional IDP groups showed a similar number of publications (9.4 vs 8.6), grants submitted (4.1 vs 4.4) and funded (1.3 vs 2.0), and job satisfaction score (3.6 vs 3.7). The CCDP group had higher odds of discussing communication (OR = 2.08) and leadership skills (OR = 2.62) and broadening their network (2.31) than the traditional IDP group. The CCDP arm reported improvements in 9 of the 14 CTSA competencies.Conclusion:The CCDP offers CTSA hubs an innovative alternative to traditional IDP tools. Future studies are needed to elucidate why the CCDP users did not fully appreciate or adopt the functionality of the online platform.

Few studies examine whether maternal and neonatal outcomes differ by time from metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) to conception. We describe maternal and neonatal outcomes among women with pregnancy after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) overall and by whether conception occurred during the period when pregnancy is not recommended (< 18 months postoperative) versus later. A prospective cohort study enrolled 135 US adult women (median age, 30 years, body mass index [BMI], 47.2 kg/m2) who underwent RYGB or SG (2006–2009) and subsequently reported ≥ 1 pregnancy within 7 years. Participants self-reported pregnancy-related information annually. Differences in prevalence of maternal and neonatal outcomes by postoperative conception timeframe (< 18 versus ≥ 18 months) were assessed. Thirty-one women reported ≥ 2 postoperative pregnancies. At time of postoperative conception (median 26 [IQR:22–52] months postoperative) median BMI was 31 (IQR:27–36) kg/m2. Excessive gestational weight gain (55

Objective: To describe alcohol use, alcohol-related harm, and alcohol-related problems preoperatively and up to 8 years following metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) in adolescents. Background: Risk for alcohol use and alcohol use disorders (AUD) increases post-Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and vertical sleeve gastrectomy in adults. However, data are lacking in adolescents who undergo MBS. Methods: This study includes 217 adolescents (aged 13–19 y) enrolled in a 5-center prospective cohort study who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or vertical sleeve gastrectomy (2007–2011) and reported alcohol use preoperatively and annually postoperatively for up to 8 years. Time to elevated Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) score, alcohol-related harm, and alcohol-related problems were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence. Results: Preoperatively, the median age was 17 years; the median body mass index was 51 kg/m2. Alcohol use frequency and average quantity of drinks per drinking day increased postoperatively (2% consumed alcohol 2–4 times/month 6 months versus 24% 8 years postoperatively, P<0.001; 2% consumed≥3 drinks per drinking day 6 months versus 35% 8 years postoperatively, P<0.001). Cumulative incidence of postoperative onset elevated AUDIT-C score, alcohol-related harm, and alcohol-related problems at year 8 were 45% (95% CI:37–53), 43% (95% CI:36–51), and 47% (95% CI:40–55), respectively. Conclusions: Nearly half of those who underwent MBS as adolescents screened positively for AUD, symptoms of alcohol-related harm, or alcohol-related problems 8 years post-MBS, highlighting the risk for alcohol use and AUD after MBS in adolescents. AUD evaluation and treatment should be integrated into routine long-term care for adolescents undergoing MBS.

Abstract Introduction: Underrepresented researchers face more challenges than their well-represented counterparts. Perseverance and consistency of interest are associated with career success in well-represented physicians. Therefore, we examined associations of perseverance and consistency of interest with Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), science identity, and other factors related to career success among underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty. Methods: This is a cross-sectional analysis of data collected from September to October 2020 among 224 underrepresented early-career researchers at 25 academic medical centers in the Building Up Trial. We used linear regression to test associations of perseverance and consistency of interest scores with CRAI, science identity, and effort/reward imbalance (ERI) scores. Results: The cohort is 80% female, 33% non-Hispanic Black, and 34% Hispanic. The median perseverance and consistency of interest scores were 3.8 (25th–75th percentile: 3.7,4.2) and 3.7 (25th–75th percentile: 3.2, 4.0), respectively. Higher perseverance was associated with a higher CRAI score (β = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.30, 1.33, p = 0.002) and science identity (β = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.19, 0.68, p = 0.001). Higher consistency of interest was associated with a higher CRAI score (β = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.23, 0.96, p = 0.001) and higher science identity score (β = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.36, p = 0.02), while lower consistency of interest was associated with imbalance favoring effort (β = –0.22; 95% CI = –0.33, –0.11, p = 0.001). Conclusions: We found that perseverance and consistency of interest are related to CRAI and science identity, indicating that these factors may positively influence one’s decision to stay in research.

Weight loss achieved with standard doses of glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) agonists among real‐world patients with type 2 diabetes has not been determined. This study sought to describe the percent change in body weight 72 weeks after starting a GLP‐1 agonist.