Measuring organizational mentoring climate: Importance and availability scales

Gender diversity at spine surgery academic conferences: a 15-year investigation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Enhancing gender diversity at academic conferences is critical for advancing women's representation and career trajectories in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

To discover trends in women's representation at major spine conferences over a 15-year period.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Conference records from the 2007-2021 annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, North American Spine Society, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS).

PATIENT SAMPLE

Authors of spine-related presentations.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Authorship by gender.

METHODS

Retrospective bibliometric analysis with univariate and multivariate modeling to identify trends and predictors of gender diversity.

RESULTS

Among 8,948 presentations, 750 (8.4%) had female first authors and 618 (6.9%) had female senior authors. There was no change in rates of female first authorship (p=.41) or senior authorship (p=.88) over time. The strongest predictors of female first authorship were having a female senior author (OR 7.32, p<.001), and delivering presentations at SRS (OR 1.95, p=.001). Factors negatively associated with female first authorship included poster format (OR 0.82, p=.039) and conference location in the United States/Canada (OR 0.76, p=.045). Similar trends were encountered for senior authorship. Productivity per senior author was similar between genders (p=.160); whereas a gender gap in productivity per first author during 2007 to 2011 (p=.020) equalized by 2017 to 2021 (p=.300). Among the 10 most productive authors of each gender, male authors delivered more presentations, but all authors shared similar format, content, and location.

CONCLUSIONS

Women's representation in spine-related presentations did not increase at three major conferences over a 15-year period. Our findings regarding the positive effects of female mentorship, and international or virtual venues merit further investigation to address the gender gap. The upstream pipeline of recruiting women into academic spine surgery also needs to be addressed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Evidence-based practice strategies for faculty professional development in clinical translational research at Institutional Development Award (IDeA) state institutions in the Mountain West

The Mountain West Clinical Translational Research - Infrastructure Network (MW CTR-IN), established in 2013, is a research network of 13 university partners located among seven Institutional Development Award (IDeA) states targeting health disparities. This is an enormous undertaking because of the size of the infrastructure network (encompassing a third of the US landmass and spanning four time zones in predominantly rural and underserved areas, with populations that have major health disparities issues). In this paper, we apply the barriers, strategies, and metrics to an adapted educational conceptual model by Fink (2013). Applying this model, we used four tailored approaches across this regional infrastructure network to: (1) assess individual faculty specific needs, (2) reach out and engage with faculty, (3) provide customized services to meet the situational needs of faculty, and (4) utilize a "closed communication feedback loop" between Professional Development (PD) core and MW CTR-IN faculty within the context of their home institutional environment. Summary statement results from participating faculty show that these approaches were positive. Grounded in best educational practice approaches, we have an opportunity to refine and build from this sound foundation with implications for future use in other CTR-IN networks and institutions in the IDeA states.

Faculty Rating of the Importance and Availability of Organizational Mentoring Climate

Organizational climate is the shared perception of and the meaning attached to the policies, practices, and procedures employees experience. University faculty can assess their organizational mentoring climate (OMC) using recently published, reliable, and valid OMC importance (OMCI) and availability (OMCA) scales. Factors affecting the OMC's importance and availability are, however, not known. By studying these factors, organizational leaders can determine whether and how to change the OMC to improve faculty mentoring outcomes. In this cross-sectional study, 300 faculty from the University of New Mexico (Main, Health Sciences Center [HSC] and branch campuses) and Arizona State University (a non-HSC campus) completed the online OMCI and OMCA scales, each with three subscales: Organizational Expectations, Mentor-Mentee Relationships, and Resources. OMCI scale items were rated from very unimportant (1) to very important (5); and, for OMCA, -1 (no), 0 (don't know), 1 (yes). The study used linear regression analysis after normalizing the scales to M=0 and SD=1. Although not explicitly targeted for recruitment, the respondents were predominantly women, non-Hispanic White, senior, tenure-track faculty members who were neither providing mentoring nor receiving mentoring. In the multivariable models, women faculty attached greater importance to mentoring climate components than men. HSC faculty and those receiving mentoring reported greater availability of mentoring climate components than their respective counterparts. Underrepresented minority (URM) faculty did not rate OMCI or OMCA differently than non-URM faculty. Faculty subgroups in this study attached varying levels of importance to the OMC and rated the availability of climate components differently. Factors impacting the importance of the OMC differed from those affecting the perceived availability of the climate components. Based on their relative importance and lack of availability, organizational leaders should create, modify and implement structures, programs, and policies to improve organizational mentoring expectations, mentor-mentee relationships, and mentoring resources, thereby strengthening their OMC.