Training More Researchers to Close the Diabetes Care Gap

What Was Studied and Why It Matters

There is a well-known problem in diabetes care: treatments that work in clinical trials often take years — sometimes over a decade — to reach everyday patients, especially those in underserved communities. The scientific field that studies how to close this gap is called implementation science. Researchers in this field ask, "Why don't proven treatments reach all patients equally, and how do we fix that?"

This study evaluated a national training program called the Institute for Implementation Science Scholars (IS-2), which ran from 2020 to 2024. Its goal was to train the next generation of researchers who could tackle chronic disease disparities — including diabetes — with better, faster, and more equitable tools.

What the Researchers Did

Fifty-nine early- and mid-career researchers joined the two-year program. They attended intensive training sessions twice a year, received one-on-one mentoring, and could apply for small research grants. Researchers measured whether scholars improved their skills, how well the mentoring worked, and how well connected participants became with one another.

What They Found

• Skills improved significantly across all 43 areas of implementation science — with the biggest gains in the most advanced skills.
• Mentoring was highly rated by participants, who consistently described their mentors as knowledgeable and supportive.
• A strong research network formed, leading to published studies and new research collaborations.
• Sharing a mentor nearly tripled collaboration odds — scholars who had the same mentor were almost 10 times more likely to work together on research later.
• Underrepresented scholars gained skills equally but were less likely to hold network ties by the end of the program, pointing to an area needing improvement.

What This Means for Diabetes Patients

When more skilled researchers focus on how treatments get delivered, patients benefit directly. Programs like IS-2 produce scientists who can identify why a particular community isn't getting access to CGM technology, insulin management education, or diabetes prevention programs — and then design real solutions.

For patients managing diabetes day to day, this kind of research influences everything from how clinics communicate care plans to how supplies like insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors reach people in rural or low-income areas. Reliable access to quality diabetes supplies — the kind offered by companies like MDS Diabetes — is exactly the type of real-world implementation challenge these researchers are trained to solve.

A Note on Equity

The finding that underrepresented scholars gained the same skills but had fewer network connections is important. Professional networks drive research careers and funding. Addressing this gap is essential if the field wants diverse voices solving diabetes disparities.

Bottom Line

This national training program successfully built a new generation of researchers equipped to get proven diabetes treatments to the patients who need them most. Mentored training works — skill gains were real, measurable, and consistent. The next challenge is making sure underrepresented researchers are fully integrated into the collaborative networks that turn good science into better patient outcomes.