17 Obtaining a clinical research Master’s degree among paradigm shifts: Is it worth it?

Objectives/Goals: Identify how graduates and talent acquisition specialists perceive the value and limitations of MS Clinical Research degrees in today’s clinical research workforce. Apply insights from this study to reimagine curriculum, mentorship, and industry partnerships that strengthen the value and recognition of MSCR programs. Methods/Study Population: This descriptive qualitative study investigated the perceived value of the Master of Science in Clinical Research (MSCR) degree amidst pharmaceutical industry shifts. Data were collected from 23 participants: 17 degree completers (DCs) and 6 talent acquisition specialists (TASs). Using purposive and snowball sampling, participants engaged in semi-structured focus groups, dyadic conversations, and individual interviews. Data were coded through directed qualitative content analysis, guided by Sheth et al.’s consumption values framework, with inductive coding to capture emergent themes. Results/Anticipated Results: Findings revealed that DCs emphasized professional identity formation, recognition barriers, curriculum impact, and beyond-the-classroom value; TASs stressed practical value, industry disruption, and bridging academia-workforce gaps. Both cohorts acknowledged MSCR’s symbolic and strategic value but highlighted persistent “experience paradoxes” where degrees alone could not overcome entry barriers. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Study shows MSCR builds core knowledge yet remains misaligned with industry needs due to skill gaps and credential ambiguity. Findings call for systemic professionalization, coordinated interventions across stakeholders, and research on identity, credential pathways, and employer perceptions.