Samson Susan, Northey Jason J, Acerbi Irene, Goga Andrei, Flink Carl L, Weaver Valerie M, LaBarge Mark A
Breast Oncology Program, Breast Science Advocacy Core (BSAC), University of California, San Francisco, 2340 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA 94115; Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94115, United States; Physical Sciences and Oncology Network Program, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94115, United States.
Department of Surgery and Center for Bioengineering and Tissue Regeneration, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
Transl Oncol. 2022 Feb;16:101325. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2021.101325. Epub 2021 Dec 30.
Advocacy engagement has been at the forefront of National Cancer Institute (NCI) efforts to advance scientific discoveries and transform medical interventions. Nonetheless, the journey for advocates has been uneven. Case in Point: NCI publication affiliation rules of engagement pose unique equity challenges while raising questions about structural representation in biomedical research. Abiding by the core rationale that publication affiliation should be tailored to employment status, the NCI has systematically denied research advocate volunteers the opportunity to specifically list NCI as an institutional affiliation on academic publications. Unpacking advocate NCI publication affiliation restrictions and its links with advocacy heritage preservation and convergent science goals poses unique diversity, equity, and inclusion challenges and opportunities. Improving the quality of structural representation in biomedical research requires new theories of action and flexible planning to advance, promote and build capacity for strategic advocacy inclusion and equity within publication affiliation initiatives. Here we highlight several opportunities for how leadership might formulate a radically different vision for NCI's approach. This perspective interrogates the best way forward for ensuring that biomedical employee and volunteer advocate workforce publication affiliation intersections are characterized by increased creativity and representation parity. Imbuing the scientist and clinical researcher archetype with social dimensions, we join NCI critical thinkers in urging employees, funded academics, and volunteer citizen scientists to collectively assume the role as paladins of science and integrity who view the triumphs of making a difference in science alongside the social responsibility of promoting transdisciplinary professionalism and the democratization of science.
倡导参与一直是美国国立癌症研究所（NCI）推动科学发现和变革医学干预措施努力的前沿。尽管如此，倡导者的历程并不平坦。举个例子：NCI关于出版物附属关系的参与规则带来了独特的公平挑战，同时也引发了关于生物医学研究中结构代表性的问题。遵循出版物附属关系应根据就业状况进行调整的核心原则，NCI系统性地剥夺了研究倡导者志愿者在学术出版物上特别将NCI列为机构附属关系的机会。剖析倡导者在NCI出版物附属关系方面的限制及其与倡导遗产保护和融合科学目标的联系，带来了独特的多样性、公平性和包容性挑战与机遇。提高生物医学研究中结构代表性的质量需要新的行动理论和灵活的规划，以推进、促进并建设出版物附属关系倡议中战略倡导包容性和公平性的能力。在此，我们强调领导层可能如何为NCI的方法制定截然不同愿景的几个机会。这一观点探讨了确保生物医学员工和志愿者倡导者群体在出版物附属关系中的交集具有更高创造力和代表性平等的最佳前进方向。我们赋予科学家和临床研究人员原型以社会维度，与NCI的批判性思考者一道，敦促员工、获得资助的学者和志愿者公民科学家共同承担起科学与诚信圣骑士的角色，他们将见证在科学中有所作为的胜利，同时肩负起促进跨学科专业性和科学民主化的社会责任。
