Group Peer Mentoring: An Answer to the Faculty Mentoring Problem? A Successful Program at a Large Academic Department of Medicine

Empowering women in sports biomechanics: exploring the impact of mentor circles

This study evaluated the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports (ISBS) women's mentor circle programme. Forty-eight ISBS women members completed a survey that provided insight into how the circles operated, perceived benefits, and challenges to participation. Most circles met every 6-8 weeks with meetings lasting 1 to 1.5 h. However, some circles did not commence or stopped meeting before the end of the 2 years. For those who actively participated, the circles provided personal and professional benefits, which included developing a supportive network and confidence, and improved work-life balance habits. Furthermore, the programme was found to be a valuable use of their time and strengthened their sense of ISBS as a supportive community, increasing their likelihood of staying an ISBS member. Time zone conflicts, lack of a group leader, and changes in individual work or personal life commitments influenced the continuation of some circles over the 2 years. Some respondents did not participate in the circle, and the main reason was lack of knowledge of the programme. Overall, the programme was considered a worthy initiative, providing a supportive network to assist in advancing women biomechanists. Future programmes should ensure a clear alignment between member's expectations and the outcomes of circle participation.

Group peer mentoring to improve faculty connections and enhance mentoring networks

BACKGROUND

Difficulty finding mentors and forging connections in academic departments can be challenging and became even more so when the COVID-19 pandemic reduced opportunities for informal networking. Even as restrictions on in-person meetings eased, many faculty preferred meetings to remain virtual. Because some of the most powerful predictors of faculty vitality are positive professional relationships and feelings of inclusion and belonging to an institution, attending to faculty needs in this area is important to mitigate undesired lingering consequences.

APPROACH

We created structured peer mentoring groups for our department's physicians and psychologists that meet virtually. Groups span career stages, academic appointments and clinical interests. The purpose was to establish a deeper culture of mentoring, increase feelings of connection to a supportive community within the department, facilitate career planning and enhance the development of skills necessary in academic medicine such as teaching skills, scholarly productivity and personal wellness.

EVALUATION

A survey conducted after the first year of the programme was completed by 70% of eligible faculty (31/45). Ninety-six percent felt the programme had created an inclusive and appreciative culture, 86% met faculty members they had never met before and 79% sought mentoring advice from a colleague they would not usually have interacted with in that manner. All participants appreciated hearing their colleagues' perspectives on topics they do not typically discuss.

IMPLICATIONS

Departmentally based group peer mentoring that spans career stages and interests can facilitate faculty connections and enhance a supportive culture of mentorship.

The power of junior faculty mentoring committees

Junior faculty mentoring committees have important roles in ensuring that faculty thrive and adjust to their new positions and institutions. Here, we describe the purpose, structure, and benefits of junior faculty mentoring committees, which can be a powerful tool for early-career academic investigators in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical (STEMM) fields. There is a paucity of information about what mentoring committees are, how to use them effectively, what areas they should evaluate, and how they can most successfully help junior faculty progress in their careers. This work offers guidance for both junior faculty mentees and mentoring committee members on how to best structure and utilize mentoring committees to promote junior faculty success. A better understanding of the intricacies of the mentoring committee will allow junior faculty members to self-advocate and will equip committee mentors with tools to ensure that junior faculty are successful in thriving in academia.

Transgender and gender diverse curriculum in medical imaging programs: a case study

BACKGROUND

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals face barriers, including harassment and discrimination, when accessing healthcare services. Medical imaging procedures require personal information to be shared, such as date of last menstrual cycle and/or pregnancy status; some imaging exams are also invasive or intimate in nature. Terminology is based on binary sex creating an inherently cis-heteronormative environment. TGD patients fear being outed and often feel a need to function as educators and advocates for their care. Incorporation of inclusive healthcare curriculum related to TGD populations is an effective means of educating new health providers and promotes safer and more inclusive spaces in healthcare settings. Educators face barriers which hinder the creation and implementation of TGD content. The purpose of this study was to examine the impacts educators are faced with when creating and delivering TGD content in their medical imaging curriculum.

METHODS

A case study of medical imaging programs at a Canadian post-secondary institute was undertaken. Data was collected via semi-structured interviews with faculty. Relevant institutional documents such as strategic plans, policies/procedures, websites, and competency profiles were accessed. Framework analysis was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The study found seven themes that influence the development of TGD curriculum as follows: familiarity and comfort with the curriculum and content change process; collaboration with other healthcare programs; teaching expertise; management of course workload and related. duties; connections to the TGD community; knowledge of required TGD content and existing gaps in curriculum; and access to supports.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding educators' perspectives can lead to an increased sense of empowerment for them to create and incorporate TGD curriculum in the future. Many post- secondary institutions are incorporating an inclusive lens to educational plans; this research can be used in future curriculum design projects. The goal is improved medical imaging experiences for the TGD population.

The faculty-to-faculty mentorship experience: a survey on challenges and recommendations for improvements

Faculty at research institutions play a central role in advancing knowledge and careers, as well as promoting the well-being of students and colleagues in research environments. Mentorship from experienced peers has been touted as critical for enabling these myriad roles to allow faculty development, career progression, and satisfaction. However, there is little information available on who supports faculty and best ways to structure a faculty mentorship programme for early- and mid-career academics. In the interest of advocating for increased and enhanced faculty mentoring and mentoring programmes, we surveyed faculty around the world to gather data on whether and how they receive mentoring. We received responses from 457 early- and mid-career faculty and found that a substantial portion of respondents either reported having no mentor or a lack of a formal mentoring scheme. Qualitative responses on the quality of mentorship revealed that the most common complaints regarding mentorship included lack of mentor availability, unsatisfactory commitment to mentorship, and non-specific or non-actionable advice. On these suggestions, we identify a need for training for faculty mentors as well as strategies for individual mentors, departments, and institutions for funding and design of more intentional and supportive mentorship programmes for early- and mid-career faculty.

Randomized controlled trial of a group peer mentoring model for U.S. academic medicine research faculty

Introduction

Midcareer is a critical transition point for biomedical research faculty and a common dropout point from an NIH-funded career. We report a study to assess the efficacy of a group peer mentoring program for diverse biomedical researchers in academic medicine, seeking to improve vitality, career advancement, and cross-cultural competence.

Methods

We conducted a stratified randomized controlled trial with a waitlist control group involving 40 purposefully diverse early midcareer research faculty from 16 states who had a first-time NIH R01 (or equivalent) award, a K training grant, or a similar major grant. The yearlong intervention (2 to 3 days quarterly) consisted of facilitated, structured, group peer mentoring. Main study aims were to enhance faculty vitality, self-efficacy in achieving research success, career advancement, mentoring others, and cultural awareness and appreciation of diversity in the workplace.

Results

Compared to the control group, the intervention group's increased vitality did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.20), but perceived change in vitality was 1.47 standard deviations higher (D = 1.47, P = 0.03). Self-efficacy for career advancement was higher in the intervention group (D = 0.41, P = 0.05) as was self-efficacy for research (D = 0.57, P = 0.02). The intervention group also valued diversity higher (D = 0.46, P = 0.02), had higher cognitive empathy (D = 0.85, P = 0.03), higher anti-sexism/racism skills (D = 0.71, P = 0.01), and higher self-efficacy in mentoring others (D = 1.14, P = 0.007).

Conclusions

The mentoring intervention resulted in meaningful change in important dimensions and skills among a national sample of diverse early midcareer biomedical faculty. This mentoring program holds promise for addressing the urgencies of sustaining faculty vitality and cross-cultural competence.

The experiences of doctorally prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students with being mentored in the Nurse-Lead programme: A focus group study

AIM

to explore experiences of being mentored and the contribution of the mentoring to leadership and professional development of doctorally prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students participating in the Nurse-Lead programme.

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is considered important for career development of academic nurses. Doctorally prepared nurses need a wide range of professional competences to develop sustainable careers. Therefore, they may benefit from a larger network of mentors, outside their own organization, to support their professional development. Therefore, a web-based leadership and mentoring programme was developed - the Nurse Lead programme.

DESIGN

A descriptive study with semi-structured focus groups.

METHOD

Three focus groups were conducted during an on-site programme meeting in 2019 with twenty-one doctorally prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students. The interview guide included questions about mentoring relationships and meaning of mentoring for leadership and professional development. The interviews were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: "Preferred characteristics of mentors", "Developing trusting relationships", "Engagement of the mentors", "Becoming a proficient researcher and team leader" and "Becoming an empowered and confident professional".

CONCLUSION

Mentoring supported the leadership and professional development of doctorally prepared nurses and doctoral nursing students. Participants were engaged in rewarding mentoring trajectories. The results indicate that a similar approach could be followed when developing mentoring programmes in the future.

The Knowledge Gap: Mentorship in Emergency Medicine Residency

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Studies of mentorship in emergency medicine show that mentored residents are twice as likely to describe their career preparation as excellent as compared to nonmentored peers. There has been significant interest in the mentor-mentee relationship in medicine; however, there is minimal guidance and published literature specific to emergency medicine residents.

METHODS

In this narrative review, we described the emergency medicine mentor-mentee relationship, discussed alternatives to the traditional dyadic model, and highlighted current barriers to effective mentorship. We conducted a structured literature review to identify relevant published articles regarding the mentoring of emergency medicine residents. Additional studies from general mentoring literature were included based on relevancy.

RESULTS

We identified 39 studies in emergency medicine literature based on our search criteria. Additional studies from general medicine literature were included based on relevancy to this review. Based on the limited available literature, we recommend maximizing the resident mentoring relationship by developing formal mentoring programs, supporting the advancement of women and underrepresented minority mentors, and moving toward team mentoring, including peer, near-peer, and collaborative mentorship. The development of a mentoring network is a logical strategy for residents to work with a diverse group of individuals to maximize benefits in multiple areas.

CONCLUSION

Alternative approaches to the traditional and hierarchal dyadic mentoring style (eg, team mentoring) are effective methods that residencies may promote to increase effective mentoring. Future efforts in mentoring emergency medicine residents emphasize these strategies, which are increasingly beneficial given the constraints and use of technology highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Are researchers in academic medicine flourishing? A survey of midcareer Ph.D. and physician investigators

Introduction

Midcareer research faculty are a vital part of the advancement of science in U.S. medical schools, but there are troubling trends in recruitment, retention, and burnout rates.

Methods

The primary sampling frame for this online survey was recipients of a single R01 or equivalent and/or K-award from 2013 to 2019. Inclusion criteria were 3-14 years at a U.S. medical school and rank of associate professor or two or more years as assistant professor. Forty physician investigators and Ph.D. scientists volunteered for a faculty development program, and 106 were propensity-matched controls. Survey items covered self-efficacy in career, research, work-life; vitality/burnout; relationships, inclusion, trust; diversity; and intention to leave academic medicine.

Results

The majority (52%) reported receiving poor mentoring; 40% experienced high burnout and 41% low vitality, which, in turn, predicted leaving intention (P < 0.0005). Women were more likely to report high burnout (P = 0.01) and low self-efficacy managing work and personal life (P = 0.01) and to be seriously considering leaving academic medicine than men (P = 0.003). Mentoring quality (P < 0.0005) and poor relationships, inclusion, and trust (P < 0.0005) predicted leaving intention. Non-underrepresented men were very likely to report low identity self-awareness (65%) and valuing differences (24%) versus underrepresented men (25% and 0%; P < 0.0005). Ph.D.s had lower career advancement self-efficacy than M.D.s (P < .0005).

Conclusions

Midcareer Ph.D. and physician investigators faced significant career challenges. Experiences diverged by underrepresentation, gender, and degree. Poor quality mentoring was an issue for most. Effective mentoring could address the concerns of this vital component of the biomedical workforce.

Development and Retention of Early-Career Clinician-Scientists through a Novel Peer Mentorship Program: Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Workgroup

Background

Early-career clinician-scientists often leave academic medicine, but strong mentorship can help facilitate retention. Beyond the traditional dyadic mentor-mentee relationship, formal peer mentoring provides a rich means to augment career development and foster independence.

Objective

To describe a model for early-career peer mentorship and the retention of participating early-career clinician-scientists in academic medicine.

Methods

In 2015, a multidisciplinary and interprofessional group of early-career clinician-scientists focused on critical care developed a peer mentoring group at the University of Michigan called the MICReW (Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Workgroup). We describe the establishment, sustainability, guiding principles, challenges, and successes of MICReW.

Results

MICReW was established to be a formal, peer-only mentoring group without the direct participation of senior mentors. The purpose of MICReW was to support and promote the research and career development of early-career clinician-scientists by creating an environment that fostered diverse opinions, constructive feedback, and camaraderie. As a group, we wrote a mission statement and defined our guiding principles. Our sustainability, growth, and adaptability (seamlessly transitioning to all virtual meetings) were possible by the continued investment of our peer members. To date, MICReW has had 30 members, of whom 15 are current members and approximately half are women. Nearly all members (n = 29/30) remain in academic positions, and half (n = 15) have been awarded career development awards. Most members also report significant benefits from being a member of MICReW.

Conclusion

The MICReW peer mentorship model is a sustainable and adaptable peer mentoring model whose members continue to be engaged in academic medicine.

Supporting Midcareer Women Faculty in Academic Medicine Through Mentorship and Sponsorship

Midcareer women faculty face unique career challenges that may benefit from mentorship and sponsorship, yet such programs focused on the needs of this career phase are scarce in academic medicine. Many midcareer faculty require intentional and individual career planning to choose a path from the broad array of options in academic medicine. Ambiguous promotion criteria, increased workloads because of service or citizenship tasks, and a lack of sponsorship are among the barriers that inhibit midcareer faculty's growth into the high-visibility roles needed for career advancement. In addition, issues faced by women midcareer faculty members may be further exacerbated by barriers such as biases, a disproportionate share of family responsibilities, and inequities in recognition and sponsorship. These barriers contribute to slower career growth and higher attrition among women midcareer faculty and ultimately an underrepresentation of women among senior leadership in academic medicine. Here, we describe how a mentoring program involving individuals (eg, mentors, mentees, and sponsors) and departments/institutions (eg, deans and career development offices) can be used to support midcareer faculty. We also provide recommendations for building a mentoring program with complementary support from sponsors targeted toward the specific needs of women midcareer faculty. A robust midcareer mentoring program can support the career growth and engagement of individual faculty members and as a result improve the diversity of academic medicine's highest ranks.

A scoping review of peer mentoring in medicine

BACKGROUND

While studies have demonstrated the benefits of mentoring between junior and senior faculty, the dearth of senior mentors remains a challenge. Peer mentoring arose out of scarcity by creating communities among faculty at similar stages. Although demonstrative studies abound, no synthesis of the literature exists to characterise programme structure, content and impact on faculty.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of peer mentoring programmes for faculty in academic medicine. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and ERIC for studies of peer mentoring programmes. Two authors independently reviewed the articles and extracted data.

FINDINGS

We reviewed the titles and abstracts of 1513 studies, 75 full-text articles, and selected 19 studies for our review. About half of peer mentoring programmes were department-sponsored. The overall size varied from 3 to 104 participants; most were organised into small groups and met monthly. Fifty-eight percent included a didactic curriculum. Several studies showed an increase in publications, grant funding, retention rates and promotion, in addition to increased personal satisfaction. Qualitative data demonstrated themes of collaboration and mutual support.

DISCUSSION

Programme outcomes were invariably positive with respect to participant satisfaction, and additionally, some studies showed an increase in publications, grant funding, retention rates and promotion. Camaraderie emerged as a strong theme in the programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review of peer mentoring programmes can guide institutions in their efforts to create similar initiatives.

Mentoring Relationships and Gender Inequities in Academic Medicine: Findings From a Multi-Institutional Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

This study examined how mentoring relationships may reinforce or mitigate gender inequities in academic medicine.

METHOD

In-depth, semistructured interviews with medical school faculty members (52 women and 52 men) were conducted at 16 institutions across the United States in 2019. Institutions were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy to seek diversity in geography, ownership (private or public), and prestige. Within institutions, purposive sampling was used to recruit equal numbers of women and men and to seek diversity in degree type (MD, PhD), age, and career stage. A coding scheme was developed through iterative analysis of the interview transcripts. All interview transcripts were then coded with the goal of identifying intersections between mentorship and experiences of and responses to gender inequities.

RESULTS

Four key themes at the intersection of mentoring relationships and gender inequities were identified. (1) Both women and men became aware of gender inequities in academic medicine through relationships with women mentors and mentees. (2) Both women and men mentors recognized the challenges their female mentees faced and made deliberate efforts to help them navigate an inequitable environment. (3) Both women and men mentors modeled work-family balance and created family friendly environments for their mentees. (4) Some women, but no men, reported being sexually harassed by mentors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that mentoring relationships may be a context in which gender inequities are acknowledged and mitigated. It also shows that mentoring relationships may be a context in which gender inequities, such as sexual harassment, may occur. Sexual harassment in academic medicine has been widely documented, and gender inequity in academic medicine has proved persistent. While mentoring relationships may have the potential to identify and mitigate gender inequities, this study suggests that this potential remains largely unrealized.

Exploring Mentoring Experiences, Perceptions, and Needs of General Internal Medicine Clinician Educators Navigating Academia: a Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Few studies examined specific mentoring needs and preferences of clinician educators (CEs). Further research on CEs' perceptions of mentoring adequacy, as related to educational development and career advancement, is needed.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims were to (1) explore general internal medicine CEs' experiences as mentees within various mentoring models; (2) examine the perceived quality, nature, and impact of mentoring on career development; and (3) determine whether specific models of mentoring impact their attitudes towards mentoring.

DESIGN

Sequential mixed methods study design answered the study questions.

PARTICIPANTS

Society of General Internal Medicine members identifying themselves as CEs.

MAIN MEASURES/APPROACH

Participants completed an anonymous online survey and a subsample participated in two semi-structured focus group discussions. Outcomes of interest were perceptions of mentoring experiences, and perspectives on quality of mentoring as well as mentoring needs specific to clinician educators.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred thirty-nine participants completed the survey (37% response rate) with 20 participants in focus group discussions. Among CEs with perceived high-quality mentor relationships (e.g., reporting strongly agree), peer mentorship was viewed as adequate mentorship (45% (n = 17) vs 24% (n = 24), p < 0.05), as beneficial for career development (77% (n = 40) vs 48% (n = 41), p < 0.01) and as being challenged to become a better CE (58% (n = 30) vs 35% (n = 29), p < 0.05), compared to reporting agree or lower. Qualitative analysis generated four themes: (1) A mentoring team promotes career advancement, (2) peer mentors are important at every stage of a CE's career, (3) there is inadequate mentoring specific to CE needs, and (4) mentoring needs protected time and skill development.

CONCLUSIONS

The traditional dyadic mentoring relationship may not adequately address all professional needs of CEs. A mentoring team can provide valuable perspectives on career goals. Peer mentoring can be powerful for professional growth. Mentoring needs change at different career stages and training in mentoring skills is essential.

The Power of Peer Mentoring to Support Women Pharmacy Faculty Personally and Professionally

Regardless of a faculty member's career stage, effective mentoring is critical for successful professional development and a thriving academic career. Traditional mentor-mentee relationships can be effective but may present challenges for some faculty depending on their individual needs and institutional resources. The use of peer mentoring circles, where group members serve as both mentor and mentee, may provide additional resources and benefits to faculty at all career stages and appear especially beneficial for women faculty because of their focus on interconnectedness and collaboration. However, literature is scarce regarding effective mentoring strategies for women pharmacy faculty. As members of one women faculty-only peer mentoring circle, we describe our experiences using this mentoring strategy and offer recommendations for other faculty members considering this approach.

Twelve tips for organising speed mentoring events for healthcare professionals at small or large-scale venues

Mentors play a critical role in the development of professionals, influencing their job satisfaction, career aspirations and evolving professional identity. A variety of mentoring models exist, each with distinct benefits and challenges. Speed mentoring, based on the concept of speed dating, provides mentees with opportunities to meet multiple mentors over a short time and pose focussed career development questions. At large-scale events such as the annual AMEE (Association for Medical Education in Europe) meeting, speed mentoring sessions can successfully connect aspiring, novice and mid-career educators with international educational leaders to facilitate transfer of valuable insights for professional growth. For some mentors and mentees, this might spur ongoing communications or even longitudinal relationships. In this paper, we aim to provide strategies for planning and implementing speed mentoring events, combining insights gained from the literature and our experience of organising speed mentoring at the 2019 AMEE meeting in Vienna. These tips will be useful to a variety of professionals planning to organise speed mentoring initiatives.

Group mentoring and leadership growth in behavioral medicine

Since its inception in 2016, the establishment of learning communities led by senior Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) members has been central to the SBM's Mid-Career Leadership Institute (Institute). At the beginning of an initial two-day intensive workshop, groups of approximately six fellows are placed together, and one or two senior SBM members are asked to lead group mentoring. Senior SBM members serve as mentors during quarterly calls that are conducted over the year in order for group members to develop and present an individual leadership project at the following annual meeting. Group mentoring relies on the social dynamic that emerges from the group's own social norms and roles; it is designed to advance the careers of group members. To our knowledge, this is the first commentary describing a program of formal group mentoring for mid-career leadership development in a professional association. Based on the authors' experience as mentors, thematic and descriptive analyses of the initial workshop evaluations, and contemporaneous notes, we discuss the structure, process, and project outcomes of the formal group mentoring in SBM's Institute. Early process evaluation of the Institute suggests that the Fellows benefitted from the group mentoring experience.

Assessing mentoring: A scoping review of mentoring assessment tools in internal medicine between 1990 and 2019

BACKGROUND

Mentoring's success in enhancing a mentee's professional and personal development, and a host organisations' reputation has been called into question, amidst a lack of effective tools to evaluate mentoring relationships and guide oversight of mentoring programs. A scoping review is proposed to map available literature on mentoring assessment tools in Internal Medicine to guide design of new tools.

OBJECTIVE

The review aims to explore how novice mentoring is assessed in Internal Medicine, including the domains assessed, and the strengths and limitations of the assessment methods.

METHODS

Guided by Levac et al.'s framework for scoping reviews, 12 reviewers conducted independent literature reviews of assessment tools in novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane, GreyLit, Web of Science, Open Dissertations and British Education Index databases. A 'split approach' saw research members adopting either Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis or directed content analysis to independently evaluate the data and improve validity and objectivity of the findings.

RESULTS

9662 abstracts were identified, 187 full-text articles reviewed, and 54 full-text articles included. There was consensus on the themes and categories identified through the use of the split approach, which were the domains assessed and methods of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Most tools fail to contend with mentoring's evolving nature and provide mere snap shots of the mentoring process largely from the mentee's perspective. The lack of holistic, longitudinal and validated assessments propagate fears that ethical issues in mentoring are poorly recognized and addressed. To this end, we forward a framework for the design of 'fit for purpose' multi-dimensional tools.

PRACTICE POINTS

Most tools focus on the mentee's perspective, do not consider mentoring's evolving nature and fail to consider mentoring holistically nor longitudinallyA new tool capable of addressing these gaps must also consider inputs from all stakeholders and take a longitudinal perspective of mentoring.

How Culture Is Understood in Faculty Development in the Health Professions: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

To examine the ways in which culture is conceptualized in faculty development (FD) in the health professions.

METHOD

The authors searched PubMed, Web of Science, ERIC, and CINAHL, as well as the reference lists of identified publications, for articles on culture and FD published between 2006 and 2018. Based on inclusion criteria developed iteratively, they screened all articles. A total of 955 articles were identified, 100 were included in the full-text screen, and 70 met the inclusion criteria. Descriptive and thematic analyses of data extracted from the included articles were conducted.

RESULTS

The articles emanated from 20 countries; primarily focused on teaching and learning, cultural competence, and career development; and frequently included multidisciplinary groups of health professionals. Only 1 article evaluated the cultural relevance of an FD program. The thematic analysis yielded 3 main themes: culture was frequently mentioned but not explicated; culture centered on issues of diversity, aiming to promote institutional change; and cultural consideration was not routinely described in international FD.

CONCLUSIONS

Culture was frequently mentioned but rarely defined in the FD literature. In programs focused on cultural competence and career development, addressing culture was understood as a way of accounting for racial and socioeconomic disparities. In international FD programs, accommodations for cultural differences were infrequently described, despite authors acknowledging the importance of national norms, values, beliefs, and practices. In a time of increasing international collaboration, an awareness of, and sensitivity to, cultural contexts is needed.

Women's leadership in academic medicine: a systematic review of extent, condition and interventions

OBJECTIVES

Because culture reflects leadership, the making of diverse and inclusive medical schools begins with diversity among leaders. The inclusion of women leaders remains elusive, warranting a systematic exploration of scholarship in this area. We ask: (1) What is the extent of women's leadership in academic medicine? (2) What factors influence women's leadership? (3) What is the impact of leadership development programmes?

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of six online databases (OvidMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and ERIC) from the earliest date available to April 2018 was conducted. Bridging searches were conducted from April 2018 until October 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) Peer-reviewed; (2) English; (3) Quantitative studies (prospective and retrospective cohort, cross-sectional and preintervention/postintervention); evaluating (4) The extent of women's leadership at departmental, college and graduate programme levels; (5) Factors influencing women's leadership; (6) Leadership development programmes. Quantitative studies that explored women's leadership in journal editorial boards and professional societies and qualitative study designs were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers screened retrieved data of abstracts and full-texts for eligibility, assessment and extracted study-level data independently. The included studies were objectively appraised using the Medical Education Research Quality Study Instrument with an inter-rater reliability of (κ=0.93).

RESULTS

Of 4024 records retrieved, 40 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extent of women's leadership was determined through gender distribution of leadership positions. Women's leadership emergence was hindered by institutional requirements such as research productivity and educational credentials, while women's enactment of leadership was hindered by lack of policy implementation. Leadership development programmes had a positive influence on women's individual enactment of leadership and on medical schools' cultures.

CONCLUSIONS

Scholarship on women's leadership inadvertently produced institute-centric rather than women-centric research. More robust contextualised scholarship is needed to provide practical-recommendations; drawing on existing conceptual frameworks and using more rigorous research methods.

Three-Generation Academic Mentoring Teams: A New Approach to Faculty Mentoring in Nursing

BACKGROUND

New faculty are often not prepared for a career in academia, and the transition can be challenging. They often come from practice environments where work expectations are clearly delineated.

PROBLEM

Traditional mentoring programs typically pair new with experienced faculty members who are expected to provide guidance and advice. Results of the hierarchical dyad method have been mixed.

APPROACH

Three generations of faculty formed a team composed of a tenured, a midcareer, and a new faculty member. The midcareer educator was better suited to help the novice prepare to teach, as they had recently been through the process, whereas the tenured faculty member was able to provide scholarship support to both.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing new faculty with 2 mentors in a constellation format, along with the opportunity to network during structured mentoring meetings, contributed to a smooth onboarding of new faculty and provided scholarship support for the midcareer faculty member.

Structuring Mentoring in Medicine and Surgery. A Systematic Scoping Review of Mentoring Programs Between 2000 and 2019

INTRODUCTION

Evidence of novice mentoring's successes in having senior clinicians support junior doctors and/or medical students in their clinical, academic, and research goals has spurred efforts to include mentoring in the core medical curriculum. However, lack of effective structuring threatens the viability of mentoring programs, precipitating ethical concerns about mentoring. This review aims to answer the question "what is known about mentoring structures in novice mentoring among medical students and junior doctors in medicine and surgery postings?," which will guide the design of a consistent structure to novice mentoring.

METHODS

Levac (2010)'s framework was used to guide this systematic scoping review of mentoring programs in medicine and surgery published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019 in PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, Embase, Scopus, Mednar, and OpenGrey. A "split approach" involving concurrent independent use of a directed content analysis and thematic approach was used to analyze included articles.

RESULTS

Three thousand three hundred ninety-five abstracts were identified. There was concordance between the 3 themes and categories identified in analyzing the 71 included articles. These were the host organization, mentoring stages, and evaluations.

CONCLUSION

The data reveal the need for balance between ensuring consistency and flexibility to meet the individual needs of stakeholders throughout the stages of the mentoring process. The Generic Mentoring Framework provides a structured approach to "balancing" flexibility and consistency in mentoring processes. The Generic Mentoring Framework is reliant upon appropriate, holistic, and longitudinal assessments of the mentoring process to guide adaptations to mentoring processes and ensure effective support and oversight of the program.

The Pivotal Role of Host Organizations in Enhancing Mentoring in Internal Medicine: A Scoping Review

In undergraduate and postgraduate medical education, mentoring offers personalized training and plays a key role in continuing medical education and the professional development of healthcare professionals. However, poor structuring of the mentoring process has been attributed to failings of the host organization and, as such, we have conducted a scoping review on the role of the host organization in mentoring programs. Guided by Levac et al's methodological framework and a combination of thematic and content analysis, this scoping review identifies their "defining" and secondary roles. Whilst the "defining" role of the host is to set standards, nurture, and oversee the mentoring processes and relationships, the secondary roles comprise of supporting patient care and specific responsibilities toward the mentee, mentor, program, and organization itself. Critically, striking a balance between structure and flexibility within the program is important to ensure consistency in the mentoring approach whilst accounting for the changing needs and goals of the mentees and mentors.

A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

Effective mentoring enhances the personal and professional development of mentees and mentors, boosts the reputation of host organizations and improves patient outcomes. Much of this success hinges upon the mentor's ability to nurture personalized mentoring relationships and mentoring environments, provide effective feedback and render timely, responsive, appropriate, and personalized support. However, mentors are often untrained raising concerns about the quality and oversight of mentoring support.To promote effective and consistent use of mentor training in medical education, this scoping review asks what mentor training programs are available in undergraduate and postgraduate medicine and how they may inform the creation of an evidenced-based framework for mentor training.Six reviewers adopted Arksey and O'Malley's approach to scoping reviews to study prevailing mentor-training programs and guidelines in postgraduate education programs and in medical schools. The focus was on novice mentoring approaches. Six reviewers carried out independent searches with similar inclusion/exclusion criteria using PubMed, ERIC, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and grey literature databases. Included were theses and book chapters published in English or had English translations published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2017. Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis was adopted to circumnavigate mentoring's and mentor training's evolving, context-specific, goal-sensitive, learner-, tutor- and relationally dependent nature that prevents simple comparisons of mentor training across different settings and mentee and mentor populations.In total, 3585 abstracts were retrieved, 232 full-text articles were reviewed, 68 articles were included and four themes were identified including the structure, content, outcomes and evaluation of mentor training program.The themes identified provide the basis for an evidence-based, practice-guided framework for a longitudinal mentor training program in medicine and identifies the essential topics to be covered in mentor training programs.

Evaluation of an Enhanced Peer Mentoring Program on Scholarly Productivity and Promotion in Academic Emergency Medicine: A Five-Year Review

OBJECTIVE

To design, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of an enhanced peer mentoring program (EPMP) for faculty in emergency medicine aimed at overcoming traditional mentoring challenges.

METHODS

Full time faculty (Clinical Instructor, Assistant, and Associate levels) were placed into peer groups (based upon their primary academic roles) led by senior faculty advisors at the Professor level. Peer groups met at least quarterly from 2012 to 2017. In lieu of a structured curriculum, session topics were informed by individual faculty surveys and peer group consensus. Areas of focus included work-life balance, prioritizing academic commitments, identification of mentors (both within and external to the department and university), networking opportunities, promotions goals, and career satisfaction.

RESULTS

Effectiveness of the EPMP was evaluated by academic productivity and advancement over a 5- year period. A total of 22 faculty members participated in the program. There was an increase in promotions to the next academic level, from 3 promotions in the five years before the program to 7 promotions in the five years of the program. Total grant funding increased 3-fold from $500,000 to $1,706,479 from the first year to the last year of the evaluation period.

CONCLUSIONS

This enhanced peer mentoring program was effective in mitigating many of the traditional mentoring challenges faced by faculty in academia and was successful in improving both academic productivity and advancement.

Enhancing geriatric oncology training through a combination of novice mentoring and peer and near-peer mentoring: A thematic analysis ofmentoring in medicine between 2000 and 2017

OBJECTIVES

Training in Geriatric Oncology is in crisis, facing increasing demands in the face of a growing population of older adults, a lack of trainers, and the need to adapt training to different settings and trainee needs. A combination of novice mentoring and near-peer and peer mentoring (C-NP mentoring) has been proposed to provide trainees with personalized training and additional support. This study proposes to evaluate the possibility of establishing a C-NP mentoring program in geriatric oncology, through extrapolation of data from well-established practices in Internal Medicine programs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic scoping review was carried out to provide scope of prevailing data and highlight the key processes behind effective C-NP mentoring programs. Six reviewers carried out independent literature searches on C-NP mentoring in medicine using Embase, ERIC, PubMed, and Scopus databases for articles published between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2017. The Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) collaboration guide and the STORIES (STructured apprOach to the Reporting In healthcare education of Evidence Synthesis) statement were used to develop a narrative from the thematic analysis of selected articles. Braun & Clarke (2006)'s approach to thematic analyses [1] and Sambunjak et al. (2010)'s approach of "negotiated consensual validation" were then used to identify the final list of themes.

RESULTS

3913 citations were identified, 133 full-text articles were reviewed, and fifteen full-text articles were included. Thematic analysis was employed to circumnavigate mentoring's context-specific nature and identified ten semantic themes including the need, outcomes, obstacles, and improvements for C-NP mentoring, mentee and mentor participation and training, and matching and mentoring processes.

CONCLUSION

Data from this review allows the forwarding of the C-NP Mentoring Framework that will potentially enhance Geriatric Oncology training. The framework ensures a balance of consistency in recruitment, training, matching, pre-mentoring meetings, assessments processes, and flexibility to inculcate personalized aspects to the training and support. The C-NP Mentoring Framework will also enable effective oversight of the program and timely support of mentees in need.

Low-Resource Project-Based Interprofessional Development with Psychiatry Faculty

Projects done in interprofessional groups can foster faculty development with minimal resources beyond what is already available at the university or medical center. Each project can yield multiple "wins" in individual faculty growth while meeting the needs of academic medical centers. These projects can build collaborative skills and a sense of community among faculty, trainees, and staff. The combination of low costs, high yields, and improvements in team skills make these approaches appealing and sustainable in resource-constrained medical centers. The authors describe 4 sample projects and their teams, needed resources, and outcomes.

Building a comprehensive mentoring academy for schools of health

Formal mentoring programs are increasingly recognized as critical for faculty career development. We describe a mentoring academy (MA) developed for faculty across tracks (i.e., researchers, clinicians, educators) within a “school of health” encompassing schools of medicine and nursing. The program is anchored dually in a clinical and translational science center and a school of health. The structure includes the involvement of departmental and center mentoring directors to achieve widespread uptake and oversight. A fundamental resource provided by the MA includes providing workshops to enhance mentoring skills. Initiatives for junior faculty emphasize establishing and maintaining strong mentoring relationships and implementing individual development plans (IDPs) for career planning. We present self-report data on competency improvement from mentor workshops and data on resources and barriers identified by junior faculty (n = 222) in their IDPs. Mentors reported statistically significantly improved mentoring competency after workshop participation. Junior faculty most frequently identified mentors (61%) and collaborators (23%) as resources for goal attainment. Top barriers included insufficient time and time-management issues (57%), funding limitations (18%), work–life balance issues (18%), including inadequate time for self-care and career development activities. Our MA can serve as a model and roadmap for providing resources to faculty across traditional tracks within medical schools.

A Systematic Scoping Review of Ethical Issues in Mentoring in Surgery

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is crucial to the growth and development of mentors, mentees, and host organisations. Yet, the process of mentoring in surgery is poorly understood and increasingly mired in ethical concerns that compromise the quality of mentorship and prevent mentors, mentees, and host organisations from maximising its full potential. A systematic scoping review was undertaken to map the ethical issues in surgical mentoring to enhance understanding, assessment, and guidance on ethical conduct.

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework was used to guide a systematic scoping review involving articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2018 in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Mednar, and OpenGrey databases. Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis approach was adopted to compare ethical issues in surgical mentoring across different settings, mentee and mentor populations, and host organisations.

RESULTS

A total of 3849 abstracts were identified, 464 full-text articles were retrieved, and 50 articles were included. The 3 themes concerned ethical lapses at the levels of mentor or mentee, mentoring relationships, and host organisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Mentoring abuse in surgery involves lapses in conduct, understanding of roles and responsibilities, poor alignment of expectations, and a lack of clear standards of practice. It is only with better structuring of mentoring processes and effective support of host organisation tasked with providing timely, longitudinal, and holistic assessment and oversight will surgical mentoring overcome prevailing ethical concerns surrounding it.

Resident Vitality in 34 Programs at 14 Academic Health Systems: Insights for Educating Physicians and Surgeons for the Future

OBJECTIVE

To clarify our understanding of how the culture of residency training influences the well-being of residents, this study reports on the vitality of residents at 34 programs across the United States and identifies characteristics of the programs, institutions and residents that are associated with high resident vitality.

DESIGN

In 2014 to 2015, residents nationally were surveyed using the validated C - Change Resident Survey. The survey assessed residents' vitality and 12 other dimensions that characterize residents' perspectives of the culture of the residency training programs: Self-efficacy, Institutional/program support, Relationships/inclusion/trust, Values alignment, Ethical/moral distress, Respect, Leadership aspirations, Mentoring, Work-life integration, Gender equity, Racial/ethnic minority equity, and self-assessed Competencies. Multilevel models were used to assess vitality within and across programs, and examine predictors including resident, program, and institution characteristics.

PARTICIPANTS

Two thousand four hundred and fifty-two residents from 11 General Surgery, 12 Internal Medicine, and 11 Pediatrics programs at 14 U.S. academic health systems.

RESULTS

One thousand seven hundred and eight residents responded (70% response rate). The mean Vitality score was 3.6 (range 1-5, where values of 4-5 represent high Vitality). There was wide variation among the 34 programs in the percent of residents who had high Vitality scores, ranging from 17% to 71%. However, the average Vitality scores within specialty (Surgery, Medicine, and Pediatrics) were not significantly different. The strongest predictors of Vitality were Work-life integration, Relationships/inclusion/trust, Institutional/program support, Res?>pect, Values alignment, and Ethical/moral distress, which together accounted for 50% of vitality variance. Individual demographics accounted for just 3% of variance.

CONCLUSIONS

Vitality is an essential component of resident well-being, and within each specialty there are programs that have excelled in promoting a culture of high vitality. Our findings suggest that we should test interventions to enhance resident vitality by focusing greater attention on providing institutional support, aligning individual and institutional values, integrating work and personal life, and facilitating relationships, inclusiveness and trust.

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is considered a fundamental component of career success and satisfaction in academic medicine. However, there is no national standard for faculty mentoring in academic emergency medicine (EM) and a paucity of literature on the subject.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to conduct a descriptive study of faculty mentoring programs and practices in academic departments of EM.

METHODS

An electronic survey instrument was sent to 135 department chairs of EM in the United States. The survey queried faculty demographics, mentoring practices, structure, training, expectations, and outcome measures. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare metrics of mentoring effectiveness (i.e., number of publications and National Institutes of Health [NIH] funding) across mentoring variables of interest.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine of 135 departments completed the survey, with a heterogeneous mix of faculty classifications. While only 43.6% of departments had formal mentoring programs, many augmented faculty mentoring with project or skills-based mentoring (66.7%), peer mentoring (53.8%), and mentoring committees (18%). Although the majority of departments expected faculty to participate in mentoring relationships, only half offered some form of mentoring training. The mean number of faculty publications per department per year was 52.8, and 11 departments fell within the top 35 NIH-funded EM departments. There was an association between higher levels of perceived mentoring success and both higher NIH funding (p = 0.022) and higher departmental publications rates (p = 0.022). In addition, higher NIH funding was associated with mentoring relationships that were assigned (80%), self-identified (20%), or mixed (22%; p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings help to characterize the variability of faculty mentoring in EM, identify opportunities for improvement, and underscore the need to learn from other successful mentoring programs. This study can serve as a basis to share mentoring practices and stimulate conversation around strategies to improve faculty mentoring in EM.

Answering Wicked Questions: Dealing With Opposing Truths as a Nursing Associate Professor

Nursing associate professors frequently are confronted with increasing responsibilities and fewer resources. These challenges commonly contribute to declines in job satisfaction and may result in departing academe. This article addresses these challenges by providing answers to four common “wicked questions” experienced by nursing associate professors: (a) How do I decline a request from a supervisor to take on additional responsibilities while continuing to support the mission of the school and advance my own scholarly productivity? (b) How do I handle the workload of multiple doctoral students with a variety of content areas that are different from my own and maintain my own level of productivity? (c) How do I handle expectations for more service, and leadership for the school, university, and professional organizations, yet the teaching and research responsibilities have not changed or have increased? and (d) What are some additional tips to being a more productive nursing associate professor?

Mentoring and Development Resources Available to New Doctorally Prepared Faculty in Nursing

AIM

This study examined faculty mentoring practices and strategies currently in place in nursing programs.

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is a critical component of organizations and can be especially important in times of organizational change. Schools of nursing are experiencing rapid organizational shifts with increases in retirement and the proliferation of Doctor of Nursing Practice-prepared faculty.

METHOD

Deans and department chairs of baccalaureate and higher degree programs across the United States participated in a web-based survey.

RESULTS

Results from the survey suggested that the vast majority of nursing programs had practices and strategies aimed at mentoring faculty that were based on the traditional mentor-protégé approach. Few programs differentiated their mentoring practices depending on the type of doctoral education or anticipated roles of the faculty member.

CONCLUSION

Our research highlights the fact that nursing programs still employ traditional methods of faculty mentoring. Recommendations for nursing programs are discussed.

A Novel Measure of "Good" Mentoring: Testing Its Reliability and Validity in Four Academic Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

Despite the well-recognized benefits of mentoring in academic medicine, there is a lack of clarity regarding what constitutes effective mentoring. We developed a tool to assess mentoring activities experienced by faculty and evaluated evidence for its validity.

METHODS

The National Initiative on Gender, Culture, and Leadership in Medicine-"C-Change"-previously developed the C-Change Faculty Survey to assess the culture of academic medicine. After intensive review, we added six items representing six components of mentoring to the survey-receiving help with career and personal goals, learning skills, sponsorship, and resources. We tested the items in four academic health centers during 2013 to 2014. We estimated reliability of the new items and tested the correlation of the new items with a mentoring composite variable representing faculty mentoring experiences as positive, neutral, or inadequate and with other C-Change dimensions of culture.

RESULTS

Among the 1520 responding faculty (response rate 61-63%), there was a positive association between each of the six mentoring activities and satisfaction with both the amount and quality of mentoring received. There was no difference by sex. Cronbach α coefficients ranged from 0.89 to 0.95 across subgroups of faculty (by sex, race, and principal roles). The mentoring responses were associated most closely with dimensions of Institutional Support (r = 0.58, P < .001), Institutional Change Efforts for Faculty Support (r = 0.52, P < .001), Values Alignment (r = 0.58, P < .001), Self-efficacy (r = 0.43; P < .001), and Relationships/Inclusion/Trust (r = 0.41; P < .001).

DISCUSSION

Data demonstrated that the Mentoring scale is a valid instrument to assess mentoring. Survey results could facilitate mentoring program development and evaluation.

Mentoring Faculty: A US National Survey of Its Adequacy and Linkage to Culture in Academic Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

The aims of this study were to (1) describe the quantity and quality of mentoring faculty in US academic health centers (AHCs), (2) measure associations between mentoring and 12 dimensions that reflect the culture of AHCs, and (3) assess whether mentoring predicts seriously contemplating leaving one's institution.

METHODS

During 2007-2009, our National Initiative on Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine (C - Change) conducted a cross-sectional study of faculty from 26 representative AHCs in the United States using the 74-item C - Change Faculty Survey to assess relationships of faculty characteristics and various aspects of the institutional culture (52% response rate). Among the 2178 eligible respondents (assistant, associate, and full professors), we classified their mentoring experience as either inadequate, neutral, or positive.

RESULTS

In this national sample, 43% of the 2178 respondents had inadequate mentoring; only 30% had a positive assessment of mentoring. There was no statistical difference by sex, minority status, or rank. Inadequate mentoring was most strongly associated with less institutional support, lower self-efficacy in career advancement, and lower scores on the trust/relationship/inclusion scale. The percent of faculty who had seriously considered leaving their institution was highest among those who had inadequate mentoring (58%), compared to those who were neutral (28%) or had positive mentoring (14%) (all paired comparisons, p < .001).

DISCUSSION

In a national survey of faculty of US AHCs, mentoring was frequently inadequate and this was associated with faculty contemplating leaving their institutions. Positive mentoring, although less prevalent, was associated with many other positive dimensions of AHCs.