ABSTRACT Peer-reviewed publications are essential for successful careers in biomedical research. The development of strong writing skills is critical for early stage investigators because publishing in reputable scientific journals significantly increases the likelihood that they will successfully navigate critical transition points in their careers, pass third-year review, achieve tenure and promotion, and receive favorable scores on extramural grant applications. Persistence is required to establish effective writing habits and strong writing skills, particularly since revision is the essence of writing well. The absence of gold-standard interventions designed to assist early-stage investigators in developing scientific writing skills is remarkable given that these skills are essential for success in biomedical science. Early-stage investigators from groups underrepresented in biomedical science tend to have fewer opportunities to develop robust writing skills aligned with research careers. Those who transition to their first faculty positions without establishing writing skills and habits often have lower rates of scholarly productivity which can negatively influence the impact scores on NIH grant applications. Writing for publication programs have become commonplace over the past two decades and many attempt to facilitate writing productivity through writing groups or writing courses Writing accountability groups (WAGs) are semi-structured, peer-led writing groups with a core group of participants that meet weekly over 10-weeks to develop a daily practice of writing scientific manuscripts. Structured writing courses emphasize writing skills improvement and train participants how to write a scientific manuscript from start to finish. Both approaches have been successful in increasing scientific manuscript productivity, however none have been evaluated in appropriately powered, theoretically driven, randomized trials. To our knowledge only two studies exclusively focused on early-stage investigators from groups underrepresented in biomedical science. The objective of the proposed Write from the Start study is to assess the outcomes, benefits, burdens, and participant satisfaction of a 6-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) on manuscript writing productivity. Early-stage investigators from backgrounds underrepresented in biomedical science (n=120) will be randomly assigned to 1) an enhanced, virtual peer-led WAG + a virtual, manuscript writing course or 2) the virtual manuscript writing course alone. The number of scientific articles published 24-months will be the primary endpoint. We will test the central hypothesis that assignment to the virtual, enhanced, peer-led WAG + virtual writing course compared to the virtual writing course alone will have favorable effects on scientific publication rates.
