new procedures can be performed. In modern IR, technology is an integral part of clinical practice—more so than many other disciplines. The question is, what kind of relationship does IR want with the scientists developing this technology? Are they just technology consumers, or do they want to be partners in the science? Obviously, it’s the latter. But if there is a disconnect and scientists are separated from the end users—the physicians—then there is a lack of conversation which could unlock the maximum potential of where we can go together. We just need to be able to communicate and network better with each other.


What are some of the challenges facing this communication? Part of it is a support system and network. Before my interview at Memorial Sloan Kettering, I had to go and look up what IR was. That was my total preparation on the field. It remains an unfamiliar discipline to a lot of scientists outside of medicine, and the breadth and scope of what is possible remains unclear and unexplored.


But IR needs partners. Partnerships and networking can increase exposure and help identify opportunities that both scientists and physicians should be looking at together. A lot of science doesn’t make it to the clinic because there’s a lack of knowledge as to what is required to perform translationally relevant research. Involving a physician from the start will substantially improve the chance that the discoveries in the lab will make it to the patient. Likewise, IRs are inventive. They have ideas and they know the problems we need to solve—but they need access to the right kind of people who can take their ideas further. With a support system, there will be a built-in network of knowledge on both sides that can be tapped into for maximum results.


One of my primary goals, right now, is to meet different members and listen to those who have been in the society for a while to understand what works, what doesn’t work and how we can make scientists more part of the work.


How has your experience with NIH-sponsored grants informed your work with SIR? Several years ago, I received the SIR Foundation Dr. Ernest J. Ring Academic Development Grant, and I cannot tell you how much the grant helped support me and led to NIH and other federal agency grants. Sometimes the very first step to personal success is someone else believing in you. That investment from SIR Foundation eventually paid off. And now, having been a reviewer on study sections and a recipient of grants and a member of the ecosystem, I see it as an opportunity to pay it back and share my experience.


Consider that the average grant application has three reviewers and it’s uncommon for more than one of them to be a physician. The other reviewers are scientists. I have the ability and perspective to look at a grant and see it differently from how a physician would. Likewise, the things that scientists find important doesn’t always overlap with what physicians would think is important. I’m able to act as a bridge and help share my perspective and hopefully help spread my experience around.


How do you think this new position will impact scientist membership in SIR? There has been a lot of discourse on equity and inclusion in the last couple of years, and that comes at many levels. In a society that is predominantly focused on clinicians, recognizing that the contributions of scientists are important, as well as understanding that we all operate on different levels and different requirements, is crucial. SIR has always been very cognizant of that and has worked to create an inclusive environment.


Further recognizing the contributions and roles of scientists in IR is a positive signal to other scientists that there is a role for us in this specialty, and it’s a signal to undergraduate students who may be in engineering that they can go on to become physicians or physician partners. It’s a signal that we are a society that cares about all our members and believes that scientists bring specific value to the work.


sirweb.org/irq | 37


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40