Click the play button to listen.
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Amazon Music | PodBean | Spotify | YouTube
See the full Episode List
Or watch the video podcast on YouTube:
In this episode, host Lora Parent, Director of Strategic Partnerships & Research Development, welcomes Dr. Jennifer Reneker (Associate Director, Clinical and Translational Research Institute & Professor at NEOMED) and Dr. Rachel Bracken (Associate Professor of Family and Community Medicine, NEOMED) for a candid conversation about the evolution of research careers.
Links:
- Become a CTSC Member
- Learn more about our Workforce Development Initiatives
- To gain access to these systems or to request an consult, submit a SPARC Request
Transcript
Jennifer:
“I always say the word search is in research and you may be doing things more than once and you may be searching like, I don't have the answer to the research question. We are going down this road together, and I don't know where it's going to take us.” Jennifer Reneker, PhD
[Intro]
Lora:
Welcome to season two. From research to real life. This is our second season of our podcast at the CTSC of Northern Ohio. I am Lora Parent, Director of strategic partnerships and Research development, and we are joined, this season with some exciting new guests, new topics for all of us to explore and dive into. This season, we are taking a new step, looking at the conversations and the stories behind our researchers and collaborators at the CTSC of Northern Ohio. Each episode, we are pairing a seasoned investigator with somebody who may be newer in their research or in their career journey, and kind of looking at the stories behind what got them started. What solidified their interest and where they are now? Today's conversation is all about how research careers begin, evolve, and adapt to changes in science and society. Doctor Jennifer Reneker is a physical therapist and researcher who has extensive experience mentoring, clinical and research doctoral learners in leading NIH funded training programs.
She is currently the Associate Director of the Clinical and Translational Research Institute and professor at NEOMED. Welcome. Can you tell us about the path that led you to where you are today. To, the path that led me into research.
Jennifer :
I started working with, physician at Akron Children's Hospital and sports medicine and, and my boss, who is a very seasoned researcher at the time, told me, go talk to him and see what his burning question is. So I went and talked to him and he said, my burning question is, I really want to know when is the best time to send as a child with a concussion to vestibular physical therapy? And when he said that to me, I was like, are you kidding me? Somebody like that has to be in the research. Like I should be able to find the answer to this question. So I was kind of deflated because I thought this isn't this. This has got to be out there. So I went and I looked in PubMed and I went and looked for the answer. And the answer was not there. There was nothing we did not know. And that entire burning question from a physician has sent me on the entire trajectory since 2012 is where I've been working on that area as management of concussion, determination of what does dizziness, what does the term dizziness even mean after a concussion?And is where I am now with working in New diagnostic technologies for concussion. So that is how I got started with one physician's burning question that has sent me on this 13 year journey.
Lora:
Great. What a powerful question that was. Yeah. And we're also joined today by Doctor Rachel Bracken. Thank you for joining us. A scholar of American literature and health humanities.
Her research explores how narratives policy in history shape how we understand our health and medicine. She is an associate professor at NEOMED. So welcome to you. Thank you for joining us today. And tell us a little bit about your journey into kind of public health and research in general.
Rachel:
Thanks so much. It is, a real pleasure to join you both this morning and to learn more about your your journey too, I think what what got me into research. I grew up in a small farming town with 700 people and not another child in sight. So I was that kid who took a book out of the library and read it overnight and returned it. So I don't think it's a surprise. It surprised me as a sophomore in undergrad that I ended up pursuing a career in the humanities, but it shouldn't have. I think that's where I was supposed to go. But I was always interested in medicine and in health. And I think also, as you know, a very good first gen working class kid, I thought I needed to pick a degree path that led directly to a job. And so medicine was that I was pre-med through undergrad. And, I tell my medical students that I decided against it because medicine smells bad. But, it's not quite that. It's just that I found myself far more interested in the questions around society, culture, politics, economics. Why is it that medicine and health care operate and hold this sort of space in our cultural imaginary? So I found myself researching less the practice of medicine and more the the culture of medicine, the history of medicine. And, my, my doctoral research studies, public health, particularly interested in the advent of germ theory.
And how does this recognition and acknowledgment that the invisible microbes that move between us, make us sick? And how does that change our understanding of what it means to live among other people, the the risks we take by occupying the same space? But also the responsibility we have to others because of how our bodies interconnect. I think we saw it a lot in, in Covid and thinking about our six feet bubble. We're not in them anymore. Right. But this this idea that our body doesn't end with our skin, but in fact, we occupy this space. So what does it mean to think of ourselves as part of a population and not an individual? These are these are heady questions that aren't necessarily scientific questions. But that background in, in Biopolitical theory, in in theories of embodiment really led me to my current research, which is in disability and thinking about how do we teach disability in health professions education.
How do we focus specifically on pathology and defect on difference? Again, those are those are charged words or words within the literature, not not ones that I necessarily endorse. And, and how can we kind of see that otherwise and contextualize this in a different way and consider social and cultural models of disability. So my my work has really turned collaborative and, and I've been very grateful for the CTSC, for the opportunities to kind of hone the, collaborative research practice, reaching out to communities and having best practices for that to be able to develop new disability education, that is community driven and community engaged.
Lora:
That's great.
Despite two very different, paths. You know, both of you have, as it sounds, found some sort of spark to kind of ignite your journeys. And so that's kind of what we're here today talking about is how, we initially got started, but then how things have changed and evolved along the way.
So, Jennifer, let's start with you. You've mentored some early career researchers and investigators. So, you know, what is your perspective on starting early?
But also adapting to change, maybe along the way.
Jennifer:
So the research environment has changed a lot over, I mean, even in the past decade. And then there's been some very recent big changes in our world. I think for me, one of the things that I thought early on was that I had to kind of do everything myself. And so I was the one who was just doing all of the grant writing. I was the one who just thought that I was the one who needed to go and collect all the data myself, and I was the one who was doing my own analyzes, and I was the one writing the manuscript largely, and I didn't have a really strong collaborative team around me, and a lot of it was a function of where I was at the time, the funding that I did or did not have at the time. And over the course of time, I mean both through things like the CTSC and the emphasis on the translational component of research and then the team science dynamic and the the desire for there to be complementary expertise within grants. I can't I cannot understate the value of that. And when I work with mentees and I start talking to them about, you know, you have you want to be very deep, but you're not really broad with your your expertise, but you need other people who have that kind of expertise in something different to be complementary. Because together you can do fantastically wild things that you can't even convey at this moment, because you don't know how that's going to look and study until you start working together. So over time, as I have built collaborative teams where I'm working with mathematicians and engineers and data scientists and then I mean, even so much so I've been in projects where we worked with fashion designers, which you wouldn't think in a rehab space, and then the tech kind of, you know, diagnostic and concussion that you would be working with fashion design. And it's true, whenever you start working with a textile, you need people who understand cloth. And so that is so much fun. Like you have no idea what you don't know about this other discipline. I think all of us think we know some things about other disciplines or other areas of expertise, but then when you start working with them, it just can blow your mind.
Absolutely. How they see a problem and how that new way of looking at it. Then the solutions that you can come up with together, it is so exciting. So in working with mentees, then I really encourage them to ask more questions, to go deeper with their expertise. And I think that's the thing as a researcher that I've learned is the more that I understand, the more expertise I've gained in the area, the more questions I have, the more that I think I'm not an expert.
Yeah, I think we live in this world right now where a lot of people think that they are an expert because they can find an answer in Google or with ChatGPT. And the reality is, there are so many more answers than the one that you can just get online. And we still, you know, we don't want to have the death of the expert because of these tools. These are just tools. But there's still people who are experts, and yet they know that. They know they have so many more questions to ask. So I really try to encourage my mentees to think those ways to think about collaboration, and that you have this deep expertise and there are so many other expertise that could be utilized. And you can I mean, it's just so exciting when you start working that way and thinking that way. And to really challenge your own expertise as you're asking questions, to realize there's so much more exploration that you can do. So those are kind of like where I've learned and how I've changed my approach, and also some of the ways that I, work with the younger generation coming in to, to keep them realizing there's more to it than what you're seeing right now.
Lora:
Yeah, I love the phrase you don't know what you don't know. And we say that quite often is to just kind of open your eyes to what else or who else is out there. That could just provide some insights. So how does that kind of resonate with you? I see you kind of, you know, in agreeance.
Rachel-
Yes. Absolutely. I love that answer. And particularly these ideas around expertise and the necessity for people, for researchers still to be pursuing that, that depth of knowledge. And I think the breadth is very important. And the the collaborative spirit is very important. But if you don't have your expert knowledge, what are you contributing to the team? And the recognition that you're going to know what you know, and there are limits to it. And I just love the comment there about, the kind of death of the expert or the the idea that many people think that they, they know the answers were our experts. There was a question on our script about the success rate. And it's like, what does success mean to you? That's an interesting one for researchers, because I think we're probably the ones who were like, well, I don't know.
Or, you know, you could be the foremost expert on the topic. And the thing that you think about is all the things you still don't know, even though you maybe know more about it than anybody else. And so I think that's the mark of success, is that that maintained curiosity and humility in the sense that, like, I don't know, there are more questions to to be asked and more answers to be discovered rather than sort of sitting somewhere and you're like, oh, I've had success, or I have, you know, achieved the goal and it doesn't end. Every project just opens more projects. It opens up more questions.
Jennifer-
Yeah, I totally agree with that. I think that success, once you are achieving a level of expertise, I think those people who appear successful to me are the ones who have attained this great level. And yet there is that humility that they continue to, to exude to other people of.
I still have a lot to learn about this topic. And sometimes you hear these people talk, you're going to be sitting in an audience and you're like, wait, what? But people need to see that. That you don't just arrive somewhere and you know everything. You don't. There's still so many things that you can ask. And that is how we solve the world's problems. That's how we solve health problems. That's how we work and acts. And we still need to do work through acts. There is still so much room for that translation of science, because there are so many questions that need to be answered. So I think, you know, having the expertise and maintaining that humility, I think that's success.
Lora-
So it almost sounds like a double edged sword. The more you collaborate, you know, your chances of succeeding or, you know, achieving your grant or your publication might be that success marker, but also now maybe you're fueled with some more ideas or new research problems. Have either of you encountered something like that along the way while you were, you know, trying to find connections or collaboration opportunities where you were on one path, but now all of the sudden, this is a great idea.
Jennifer:
And I have to pursue that. So have you either maybe experienced something like that? Yeah. So my biggest one would be when I moved to Mississippi. And so what happened was I was, as I told you, I was here in Ohio at the time I was working with a physician. Sports medicine got me on the burning question. And the way I started going, I finished my PhD and I had been working in an area of, diagnosis and then management, like the best ways to manage concussion. And how could we get people back to life and return to play faster, safely? And then I found myself in a situation where I was going to be moving to Mississippi, and I thought, oh, this is okay.
I'm just going to continue my line of research. I'm going to go down there. And when I got down there, that wasn't going to be possible. Based on I didn't have the same access to patients like my environment, my colleagues, everything had changed. And I was a little bit devastated for a while because I just thought this line of inquiry was where it was going to be.
And then kind of simultaneously, I, I understood that there was there was a huge rural urban disparity, in access to care for concussion in that state. And it's a real thing, which is why telehealth is used so widely across the state of Mississippi. And so I came to understand that, which is something I didn't really understand, because that wasn't I was in Northeast Ohio and there was lots of concussion clinics, and I didn't realize that this was a problem.
It is a problem in a state like Mississippi. And I also got introduced to a technology virtual virtual reality. And all of a sudden it kind of came together with me in my head. I was like, wait, I think we could use virtual reality, and we could create something to integrate into telehealth so that we can kind of bridge the gap and the disparity.
Like, is there a way we could use this for diagnosis? Is there a way we could use this for management in remote locations? And now that has taken my research path on that, and I have brought that back to Ohio with me eight years later, that I continue to work on. So, yeah, I mean, it was a situational kind of thing, and it caused my research to take this sharp turn.
I was still related, but it was a make it work kind of moment. And now I brought that back to Northeast Ohio and I'm continuing to work with that through the CTSC and new collaborators here, to, to try to solve that problem.
Lora :
Yeah. Excellent.
Rachel:
I think a lot of mine, a lot of those moments in research come from teaching for me, where there is something that has to be taught, where there is some gap that I sort of recognize. And a lot of my research is focused on health professions education. And so, the kind of community based work is, is a lot about how do we develop curriculum, how do we refine, how do we evaluate, health professions curriculum focused on, you know, disability consciousness.
So coming to NEOMED and starting a new career as a, you know, an English PhD and working in a medical school, there were things that I was teaching that opened new doors for me in terms of research and the sort of recognition that, oh, this isn't something that is actually widely taught or standardized, across, across medical schools.
And so the question came from teaching and how have people taught it? How should they teach it? And realizing that there isn't an answer yet and having that moment of, oh, but why is it there enhancing? Just like your, your concussion story. And and that has, that has opened a lot of doors and I'm thinking, well, what would be the best sort of way to approach this?
Again, I, I study literature, I teach, I teach literature seminars. I, you know, we, we read stories and books and recognizing that, in terms of the kind of like translational sort of piece, there needs to be a connection for health professions students between that and actual clinical practice. And so that got me into the realm of of developing simulated patient education and creating patient simulations. I work with folks with disabilities and a whole new world, many research questions to be asked there about, you know, effective, pedagogical design, evaluating, you know, outcomes of that. And then also how do engage the community and to make sure that that is responsive to community needs. So pretty much the same as, you know, I think in in graduate school, you have your project and, and your world revolves around your research project. And you were meant to be developing that sort of depth of knowledge. And then you get a job and you're in a place and there's context and there's other factors that push you to see your expertise in a sort of broader sense and say, okay, but what are the real questions, challenges, you know, barriers that are here that that we need to be responsive to.
And it is challenging. But I think it's also really invigorating. And there's so much that just kind of gets opened up by saying, oh, here I am. This is what I've got, right? What do I do with it?
Jennifer:
Well, I think it's really cool how you came in with this degree. That seems right at the surface, kind of unrelated, but nobody would have approached the problem or the questions that you're asking without that background and so that's the example of how somebody else comes in with a completely different field of view. And they approach the problem and they see the problem very differently. But how it adds richness to the education of students, because she sees it differently and therefore she's approaching the problem differently, and she's teaching them a different way to look and see that their patients or the world interacting with them, which is really important education for students who are going to be interacting with the broad population.
Rachel:
Yeah. Yeah, I think so. I think back to kind of earlier in our conversation also like the idea of humility, there's the humility of recognizing what you don't know. But I think also the humility and the respect for other researchers, other disciplines and other areas of expertise. I think we still kind of battle with the sort of CP snow, you know, two cultures, science versus art kind of idea.
And you talking about working with like, people who are experts in textiles. Like, that's fantastic, right? Because I think, you know, those of us in the humanities are asked all the time, well, what are you going to do with that? And what's the relevance? And I feel like it's it's harder to make the case for why our arcane expert knowledge matters.
And yet, it really does. And I think the, you know, key to this kind of collaborative research and interdisciplinary research is, is never dismissing another person's depth of expertise as being. And I don't know, you know, that's irrelevant or that's silly or that's just, you know, that's fluffy kind of stuff. can't tell you how many times I've been asked how do you even do research in English? And, you know, the idea that there are robust research methodologies and, you know, humanistic and artistic disciplines is still foreign to to many people. And I think that humility and respect to saying, oh, somebody else knows a thing that could be valuable for you too.
Lora:
Yeah. Interesting. So both of you think back to when you first started,and maybe the impact of social media technology. How has that maybe impacted where you are today? As compared to, you know, being new to the scene and maybe not knowing as much as we do now or how much technology has influenced what we do.
Jennifer:
Yeah, I think there's a I have a couple directions to go with this. One thing that I when I was doing a lot more teaching, playing off of my last answer is I would have the students find a news report about a journal, a very specific journal article. So it had to be, publication that was in the newspaper that specifically cited, study. And they had to read that publication, like the newspaper publication, and then they had to go find the original research and to see how well aligned the newspaper, what was put into the play and what was really the the message or the findings in the study. And then I also showed them an example of where that was done incredibly poorly, and it resulted in a firestorm across all kinds of media outlets. And the researcher had to come back and issue like, this is not what that was. So I wanted them to really value then that part of the responsibility of having a graduate degree is to go to the original sources so that you can help interpret that for your patients, because there is a lot out there in social media that is not correct at all. Because it's a misinterpretation of the actual publication. It is taking it a bit too far. So I think that goes back to the education of educating our students about their responsibility of. And we're both working with, graduate students on that. And sometimes even you as a researcher might need to kind of put forth your own correction, like help, because it is affecting people. Whenever this gets translated into the lay land poorly. I think as far as the rest of your question going into technology, this is kind of taking a little bit of a tangent, but one of the great things that's kind of gotten more evidence into the hands of the more lay community is social media. And the way that journals are now encouraging us to write something that could be in a tweet or in a, you know, to post it to some social media site that the journal is actually doing that they want you to write it, though. Yeah. And I think that makes your research a little bit more digestible. It also is great whenever they're asking the researcher to do that, instead of, again, having somebody else interpret your research for you into that lay message, because it may not be correct. Yeah. So yeah, I think us being involved in the translation of that to the community is also really important. So the message, the true message gets through.
Rachel:
Yeah. Yeah. I think that, sort of respecting the trust within the community, it's it's very interesting because I think so much of so much of that is like the values of, of disability studies and disability theory work around universal design and community engagement.
And, you know, who who holds expertise and how do you share expertise and how do you not kind of just, I don't know, parachute in and say, here we solved your problem without ever asking, what is the problem? What do you want? How should we do this? What are your ideas? What do you want to see done? So, so much of that kind of universal design, but also that sort of respectful, you know, bidirectional communication is is so crucial to effective research anywhere.
Lora:
Kind of pivoting here. I'd love to hear your thoughts on how someone in your field has influenced or surprised the other. So has anything that Rachel has said maybe triggered something new? Or maybe sparked a new curiosity or research question since we've been talking, or vice versa?
Jennifer:
Yeah. I've appreciated, Rachel's use of language and specifically the word appreciate.
We talked about, the humility arriving at success and having humility. And I think the other part that I really liked is like adding to it the the concept of appreciating, like, genuinely
the humility of knowing there are more things that I need to know, and there's appreciation for other people's point of view. I think that if you are an expert and you are able to maintain your own humility and yet know that you have an expertise, and then also have the appreciation for other people who see the world differently than you, then then you are a success.
And I appreciate those words. Like I'm using the word appreciation right now, but I was like, yeah, I'm really thinking about what denotes. And I think those two words are kind of like the anchors is you have an expert who has their own humility and then appreciates the perspective of others just talking to Rachel and her, you know, hearing her perspective,
coming from, you know, an English, perspective, thinking about the humanities.
I have been way over here in clinic, and, you know, what was what you call more hard science numbers? I'm more of a quantitative kind of researcher. And so shifting over here, it is very interesting to listen to her talk. I love also the way that she thinks about teaching disability and communication, to people who have disabilities because that's my that was my original line of
You know, as a clinician, I was I worked in rehab. I worked with people who had severe,
disabilities and functional limitations that I was trying to help them rehab from or learn how to manage life with. And so I also really value that perspective in her work in teaching medical students to curtail their expertise in communication, and also thoughts about that population as, as a different population that has unique needs.I think that's really, really important in teaching our young people coming up into the medical profession.
Rachel:
Yeah. Well thank you. I've really enjoyed hearing your career trajectory. I think. I think so often we have this sort of sense that again, like to the do the idea of success, right, that they're we're going to a place and there's some sort of like stability thing.
There's like a time where we've made it right and then you're right and then things are stable. And, and I think hearing how you've adapted to different environments that you have worked on in each one has sparked sort of a new creative or research interest and just continuing to evolve. I think that's really inspiring and admirable and I mean, I think for the, you know, voraciously curious person in me, like, it's wonderful to know that.
Okay. So at some point we don't just like Peter out and get bored, like there's always something new and, and something else to kind of explore or new partnerships or new perspectives on even the same area of expertise. So I'm excited to know that it will be exciting forever.
Jennifer:
Yeah. I think as you go on in your career, you figure out, that time is running out and there are still so many questions to ask.
Rachel:
Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Things that you want to explore and work on and learn. So kind of a,
Lora:
A culminating question, I guess, is if you had to give one piece of advice to a researcher starting their journey, or maybe somebody who is maybe stuck in their ways and, you know, needs to explore more avenues.What is something that may be a nugget of wisdom that you could pass on, to the next gen or even, current generation researchers?
Rachel:
I think encouraging folks not to, I don't know, I'm trying to think of some sort of idiom or metaphor for this, but basically don't count yourself out, like, don't take yourself out of the running or think that you can't do it. And, and I again, balancing with the humility piece and the sort of recognition of your own, you know, depth of knowledge and area of expertise.
But I think that the way that we are trained, particularly in graduate school, where you you are in a disciplinary home, you're probably within a sort of theoretical and methodological home within that broader discipline. And you do things sort of one way, and it can be hard to see the broader applications or transferability or other things that one might do with it. And you can get a very rigid sense of what your research is and what or researcher can do. And so I think when opportunities arise, don't tell yourself why couldn't possibly do that. I never imagined that I would be working in disability research. That wasn't something that existed in my world as an undergraduate. Even as a graduate student. And so knowing when you can say yes and and not say, you know, I don't know, not in my wheelhouse, not going to do it. And there's a sense of like, okay, well, don't take on something that you can't don't, you know, become. So I don't know, hubristic as to think that you could do anything, but don't count yourself out to really like, kind of take that risk and trust that there are mentors, there are senior scholars on projects there.
There are people who are going to really get in. If you're going to do far out of bounds, but also push yourself, you know, to learn that and to see what it what it could be.
Jennifer:
Yeah, I think it's along the exact same lines is one of the things that I tell it has to do with the conversation we were just having about there is no like a rival. I think one of the things I tell students is, you know, when students start down the line of a research project, I think they think it's going to be very linear, and we're going to do this next step and it's going to go like this, this, this, and then I'm going to get there to whatever end of the project. And, and I, I always say
the word search is in research and you may be doing things more than once and you may be searching like, I don't have the answer to the research question. We are going down this road together, and I don't know where it's going to take us. And so this isn't a professor has the answer. She's not giving it to us. It is. We are searching for the answer. And we it it may lead us in different directions. And we have to be willing to to do that. And that's just on one project. But like, that's your whole life as a researcher. And so don't resent that. Don't resent that your career may go in different directions, or that the the question that you went to answer, you're not finding the significance like that is not and that is not a failure of you or your research question.
It it should open up other questions because there isn't some arrival that you get. This research published and you have a significant and finding and therefore you got there. That's not how it works. And I never feel that way after a publication. It's like on to the next.
So I think it's the encouragement, like, like Rachel was saying, like, don't count yourself out, but like stay in the game and realize what you've decided to get yourself into.
You should be searching. You should be searching always. Yeah. It's part of the research. And and don't think you're going to arrive at some expectation or it's some place where that ends. It shouldn't because that is the job that you signed on for. That is, you know, what you've decided to do and and answering those questions, it shouldn't be easy or they would have already been answered. So if you want to be good at this, then stay in the search. Yeah. Great endless pursuit of new knowledge right there isn't like the answer to be found. I don't even know what the answer is out there.
Lora:
Yeah, I love that. Great. So maybe specific to your, perspective fields, but what is getting you excited about? What's to come? Is it the unknown? Or is it something else that's driving in your field? So tell us what's what's to come.
Jennifer:
So I am personally really excited about new methods and developing methods in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning I think that truly, this is just such.
It is a tool. It is not the end all, be all, but it is a tool. And when you're working with people who really know how to, it's not even just using the tool. I mean, there are people who know how to build the tools and know how to to use this to approach data. And again, I'm talking more quantitatively, they know how to approach data and build new methods so that you can answer old questions differently and answer new questions differently as well. And so that's where my current research project is heavily going down. Is, we're collecting a lot of sensor based data using, again, moving into the virtual reality space. And we're collecting a lot of sensor based data and processing that data at the same time, and looking at the structure within the data, like, how is that the correlation structure, how things are correlated within each other that are from different kinds of data sources? It's it's a tool that we have never seen anything like before. And so I am very excited, I think that this tool and I'm going to keep using that because this is the I is not the expert. We are the experts. And then we use those tools and it's just very exciting because even where we were two years ago is light years behind where we are now.
And if you look two years into the future, we can't even see the way that, you know, questions are going to get to answer how it's going to change the provision of health care and the translation of science into to medicine, even within like a lot of the work we do at neo med is pre-clinical and basic science, and there's so much data that could be mined and new methods used to look at that data that could then potentially translate into clinical findings.
And so it is a really exciting time to see how all of that is going to come together. And personally, I mean, I very optimistic about what the future holds with with looking at with AI, right.
Rachel:
I think I am most excited to see it. There is quite a lot of interest, new interest, it seems, new publications around, disability conscious health professions education.
I think the official designation of people with disabilities as a population experiencing health disparities from the NIH in fall 2023 has certainly, kind of boosted awareness here. And this acknowledgment that, we really do need to be addressing the root causes of health disparities. And there has been exciting research, you know, that came out of, you know, Hastings Center and other places where there's just a lot more publication, where people are sort of talking about how how do we develop this kind of education to make sure that we are preparing health care professionals to, more comprehensively, compassionately, and, you know, effectively care for folks with disabilities. So that's exciting to see. I think, you know, as a researchers, there's always that like competitive edge, too, of just like, wait a minute, who's who's coming in? And,
you know, is there going to be more competition to get things done and or two people working, you know, two teams working on the same thing. And but that's also it's exciting, right?
It can kind of push you to get work done faster and stay focused. But also exciting to see that kind of build and complementarity of research and to see how what you're doing, compares to what other research teams are doing. So to feel less isolated in that it is an area focus for more people is pretty exciting. Not just for the research questions, but for what it actually means for patients and communities.
Lora:
Great. Well, I want to thank you both for this really engaging conversation. I've learned some new things and maybe some new vernacular that I can take back and, and use. But for our listeners as well, if they are interested in, in collaborating, you know, the CDC of Northern Ohio is, one of our, our main kind of proponents is collaboration and, you know, giving access to researchers that they might not have otherwise.In their own little, you know, institutional bubble. So, providing opportunities to learn, to connect, to train together, and share what they're working on. I think it's really critical to establishing not only, broader awareness, but the dissemination of that as well, and, and giving that access to information that we just normally maybe wouldn't find or, you know, otherwise be be given or granted access to. So I again, appreciate both of your time today and coming here to, to chat and connect, for the rest of our viewers,feel free to follow us on social media, connect with us on our website and inquire with our Research navigator if you have questions about, you know, what the future of research looks like for you? How to incorporate AI and use the tools accordingly? But also to take up space, where we may. So thank you for listening and we will see you next time.