Table 3.

Self-reported impact of CRTI (N = 321)

CharacteristicNo. (%)
Instrumental to retention in hematology research  
 Strongly disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Disagree 14 (4.4) 
 Neutral 51 (15.9) 
 Agree 111 (34.6) 
 Strongly agree 139 (43.3) 
CRTI facilitated career development in research  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 13 (4.0) 
 Neutral 35 (10.9) 
 Agree 108 (33.6) 
 Strongly agree 160 (49.8) 
Allowed better understanding of requirements to succeed in research  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 4 (1.2) 
 Neutral 16 (5.0) 
 Agree 115 (35.8) 
 Strongly agree 181 (56.4) 
CRTI increased feeling connected to investigators in hematology  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Neutral 21 (6.5) 
 Agree 79 (24.6) 
 Strongly agree 210 (65.4) 
Since CRTI, I continue to feel connected to investigators in hematology  
 Strongly disagree 
 Disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Neutral 16 (5.0) 
 Agree 89 (27.7) 
 Strongly Agree 178 (55.5) 
NA 32 (10.0) 
CharacteristicNo. (%)
Instrumental to retention in hematology research  
 Strongly disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Disagree 14 (4.4) 
 Neutral 51 (15.9) 
 Agree 111 (34.6) 
 Strongly agree 139 (43.3) 
CRTI facilitated career development in research  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 13 (4.0) 
 Neutral 35 (10.9) 
 Agree 108 (33.6) 
 Strongly agree 160 (49.8) 
Allowed better understanding of requirements to succeed in research  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 4 (1.2) 
 Neutral 16 (5.0) 
 Agree 115 (35.8) 
 Strongly agree 181 (56.4) 
CRTI increased feeling connected to investigators in hematology  
 Strongly disagree 5 (1.6) 
 Disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Neutral 21 (6.5) 
 Agree 79 (24.6) 
 Strongly agree 210 (65.4) 
Since CRTI, I continue to feel connected to investigators in hematology  
 Strongly disagree 
 Disagree 6 (1.9) 
 Neutral 16 (5.0) 
 Agree 89 (27.7) 
 Strongly Agree 178 (55.5) 
NA 32 (10.0) 
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal