Mentoring in pediatric oncology: a report from the Children's Oncology Group Young Investigator Committee

Committed to Success: A Structured Mentoring Program for Clinically Oriented Physicians

Objective

To examine impacts of a structured mentorship committee program on academic promotion and participant perceptions because impacts of formal mentorship programs for clinical faculty are unknown.

Participants and Methods

This prospective cohort study at a Midwestern Veterans Affairs tertiary care system from December 17, 2019 to December 31, 2022 included clinical track faculty in the Medicine Service below the rank of Clinical Associate Professor. Mentoring meetings (mentee, committee chair, and mentors) were generally held twice annually. All participants were surveyed after each meeting (response rate: 100%).

Results

All 23 of 23 (100%) eligible faculty were enrolled as mentees, and 49 distinct meetings occurred. Three (13%) mentees were promoted, and the remaining 20 (87%) continued in the program. Mean scores (SD), scaled 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), for mentors and mentees were 4.71 (0.51) and 4.80 (0.54) for "effective use of my time"; 4.58 (0.64) and 4.37 (0.49) for "appropriate progress since last meeting"; 4.52 (0.66) and 4.31 (0.64) for "program increased my work satisfaction"; and 4.07 (0.96) and 3.75 (0.92) for "program reduced my work burnout," respectively.

Conclusion

Clinically oriented physicians viewed the program positively. It appeared to help junior faculty get promoted and led to improved work satisfaction and reduced burnout.

Longitudinal program evaluation of an inter-institutional mentorship network for pediatric rheumatology using a quality improvement framework

BACKGROUND

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Mentoring Interest Group (AMIGO) is an inter-institutional mentorship program launched to target mentorship gaps within pediatric rheumatology. Initial program evaluation indicated increased mentorship access. Given the small size of the pediatric rheumatology workforce, maintaining a consistent supply of mentors was a potential threat to the longevity of the network. Our aims were to: (i) describe the sustainability of AMIGO over the period 2011-2018, (ii) highlight ongoing benefits to participants, and (iii) describe challenges in the maintenance of a mentorship network.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach centered on a quality improvement framework was used to report on process and outcomes measures associated with AMIGO annual cycles.

RESULTS

US and Canada Pediatric rheumatology workforce surveys identified 504 possible participants during the time period. As of fall 2018, 331 unique individuals had participated in AMIGO as a mentee, mentor or both for a program response rate of 66% (331/504). Survey of mentees indicated high satisfaction with impact on general career development, research/scholarship and work-life balance. Mentors indicated increased sense of connection to the community and satisfaction with helping mentees despite limited perceived benefit to their academic portfolios. Based on AMIGO's success, a counterpart program for adult rheumatology, Creating Adult Rheumatology Mentorship in Academia (CARMA), was launched in 2018.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the challenges of a limited workforce, AMIGO continues to provide consistent access to mentorship opportunities for the pediatric rheumatology community. This experience can inform approaches to mentorship gaps in other academic subspecialties.

Implementation of a Mentoring Program for Mentee-Mentor Satisfaction: A Longitudinal Pilot Study

Introduction

Mentoring is a unique educational workplace relationship that can support both the mentee and mentor's skill, knowledge, social, and emotional needs. The primary aim of this longitudinal pilot study was to implement a formal mentoring program to assess its effect on mentee and mentor satisfaction.

Methods

Data was collected from two hospitals in New South Wales, Australia in late 2018 and early 2019. Junior doctors (mentees) and senior medical staff (mentors) were asked to complete pre-, mid-, and oost-program surveys, with questions relevant to mentee-mentor satisfaction, interactions, and participation. Mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models were used to assess the program effect on mentee-mentor satisfaction, while Fishers' exact test was used to evaluate mentee-mentor interactions and participation.

Results

Although there was evidence of upwards trends in the proportion of mentees and mentors who reported their satisfaction in the program as excellent and rated their work satisfaction as being very influenced by the program, both trends were statistically non-significant. While our study was likely underpowered, high participation rates provide promising evidence of the program's acceptability and feasibility.

Conclusion

Though not reaching statistical significance, study results suggest that the implementation of a mentoring program has the potential to increase satisfaction levels among its participants, be they mentees or mentors. It is recommended that future studies recruit larger samples thereby having sufficient statistical power. Furthermore, causality should be explored in more detail through a multi-site randomized controlled trial design.

Longitudinal program evaluation of an inter-institutional mentorship network for pediatric rheumatology using a quality improvement framework

Background

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Mentoring Interest Group (AMIGO) is an inter-institutional mentorship program launched to target mentorship gaps within pediatric rheumatology. Initial program evaluation indicated increased mentorship access. Given the small size of the pediatric rheumatology workforce, maintaining a consistent supply of mentors was a potential threat to the longevity of the network. Our aims were to: (i) describe the sustainability of AMIGO over the period 2011-2018, (ii) highlight ongoing benefits to participants, and (iii) describe challenges in the maintenance of a mentorship network.

Methods

A mixed-methods approach centered on a quality improvement framework was used to report on process and outcomes measures associated with AMIGO annual cycles.

Results

US and Canada Pediatric rheumatology workforce surveys identified 504 possible participants during the time period. As of fall 2018, 331 unique individuals had participated in AMIGO as a mentee, mentor or both for a program response rate of 66% (331/504). Survey of mentees indicated high satisfaction with impact on general career development, research/scholarship and work-life balance. Mentors indicated increased sense of connection to the community and satisfaction with helping mentees despite minimal perceived benefit to their academic portfolios. Based on AMIGO's success, a counterpart program, Creating Adult Rheumatology Mentorship in Academia (CARMA), was launched in 2018.

Conclusions

Despite the challenges of a limited workforce, AMIGO continues to provide consistent access to mentorship opportunities for the pediatric rheumatology community. This experience can inform approaches to mentorship gaps in other academic subspecialties.

Children's Oncology Group 2023 blueprint: Nursing discipline

In contrast to other Children's Oncology Group (COG) committees, the COG nursing discipline is unique in that it provides the infrastructure necessary for nurses to support COG clinical trials and implements a research agenda aimed at scientific discovery. This hybrid focus of the discipline reflects the varied roles and expertise within pediatric oncology clinical trials nursing that encompass clinical care, leadership, and research. Nurses are broadly represented across COG disease, domain, and administrative committees, and are assigned to all clinically focused protocols. Equally important is the provision of clinical trials-specific education and training for nurses caring for patients on COG trials. Nurses involved in the discipline's evidence-based practice initiative have published a wide array of systematic reviews on topics of clinical importance to the discipline. Nurses also develop and lead research studies within COG, including stand-alone studies and aims embedded in disease/ treatment trials. Additionally, the nursing discipline is charged with responsibility for developing patient/family educational resources within COG. Looking to the future, the nursing discipline will continue to support COG clinical trials through a multifaceted approach, with a particular focus on patient-reported outcomes and health equity/disparities, and development of interventions to better understand and address illness-related distress in children with cancer.

Children's Oncology Group's 2023 blueprint for research: Young investigators

The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Young Investigators (YI) Committee is an administrative committee in which liaisons represent 30 COG committees, and was created to facilitate the integration of YIs into the organization, and prepare them for future COG leadership roles. The mentorship program has mentored over 400 YIs since 2005 and currently has 175 active participants. The COG YI Master Roster is a database YIs can join, which allows them to post their interests and accomplishments to COG leadership, and 321 YIs have already joined this list. The YI Committee has held virtual symposia designed to describe how COG operates and provide guidance on how YIs can reach their goals; over 300 YIs have attended these since 2021 and have consistently rated them as helpful. Through these and other elements of the program, the YI Committee remains committed to developing a future pipeline of new investigators.

Children's Oncology Group's 2023 blueprint for research: Diversity and health disparities

The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Diversity and Health Disparities Committee's (DHDC's) mission is to guarantee the highest standard of care for children and adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer regardless of ethnic, racial, gender, or socioeconomic background. We strive to identify and address issues of disparity within the existing scientific structure of COG and to support research across COG to improve survival by ensuring equitable access to COG-sponsored clinical trials. We are committed to advance COG-led research identifying mechanistic drivers of disparities and, concurrently, evaluating interventions to alleviate disparities in the COG trial setting. As trials identify the most promising therapies, diverse representation is critical to ensure that findings are relevant to everyone. Factors impacting clinical trial participation among vulnerable populations are complex, consisting of barriers at societal, systems, and individual levels. Recent efforts by investigators within DHDC demonstrated that trial-embedded collection of family-reported sociodemographic data and social determinants of health (SDoH) is feasible and acceptable in the context of COG. Diversity in the pediatric oncology workforce is essential and one potential approach to improving representation on clinical trials. To support and retain diverse oncology providers and researchers, a Minority Young Investigator Award (MYIA) was created to facilitate opportunities for graduating trainees and YIs with an interest in childhood cancer disparities research within COG. Although there are challenges to achieve the DHDC's priorities, only through collaboration and support for this work we will be able to elucidate mechanisms underlying inferior survival outcomes for historically marginalized children and AYA, and more importantly, implement interventional investigation to improve outcomes.

It Takes a Village: A Narrative Review of Anesthesiology Mentorship

Mentorships play a critical role in the development of physician careers and should be tailored within a structured, evidence-based mentoring program to ensure mutual benefit and avoidance of pitfalls. We offer a narrative review of the current literature and commentary on mentoring at the medical student, GME trainee, and early career faculty levels within anesthesiology, and propose a framework on which an effective mentoring program can be implemented.

"There's so much to be done": a qualitative study to elucidate research priorities in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

Objective

There is a pressing need for high-quality, comprehensive research to describe the natural history, best treatments, access to care and disparities in care for patients with childhood-onset SLE (cSLE). Building on a previously published survey study of cSLE clinicians and researchers to describe research priorities in cSLE, the primary objective of this study was to conduct expert interviews to define high-priority areas for cSLE research.

Methods

Individuals with identified multidisciplinary expertise in cSLE were recruited worldwide using purposive sampling technique. Experts participated in open-ended, semistructured qualitative interviews. Interviews were designed to elicit expert perspectives on research priorities, optimal research approaches, and factors that facilitate and hinder advancing cSLE research. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and de-identified for analysis. Analysis for underlying themes of cSLE expert perspectives was performed using a constant comparative approach.

Results

Twenty-nine experts with diverse clinical and research backgrounds participated. Themes emerged within five domains: (1) expanding disease knowledge; (2) investigator collaboration; (3) partnering with patients and families; (4) improving care to optimise research; and (5) overcoming investigator barriers. Choosing a singular area of focus was difficult; experts identified many competing priorities. Despite the numerous priorities that emerged, experts described several existing and potential opportunities for advancing cSLE research.

Conclusions

In addition to the priorities identified by cSLE experts in this study, the opportunities for advancing cSLE research and care that were proposed should be used as a foundation for creation of a cSLE research agenda for both research and funding allocation.

Analysis of Social Policy and the Effect of Career Advancement Support Programs for Female Doctors

Background: In Japan, the number of female doctors has gradually increased; however, they form less than half of the average percentage (46.3% in 2016) among the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development member countries. In addition, some female doctors reduce their working hours for childbirth, housework, and childcare. Thus, women find it challenging to continue medical practice in Japan. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) established a time-bound grants program from 2007 to 2009 to support female doctors and improve their working environment. This study examines the program contents and the increase in female doctors in university hospitals. Materials and Methods: Using individual data from the Survey of Physicians, Dentists, and Pharmacists from 1996 to 2016, we compared two categories of female doctors, faculty and nonfaculty members, at university hospitals that received grants compared to those that did not. In addition, we reviewed the support program for female doctors and nurses developed by nine university hospitals using content from the MEXT and information from previous studies. Results: Most programs included in-hospital childcare and shorter working hours. There were fewer women in the nine hospitals receiving grants compared to other university hospitals. There were significant differences in the percentages of male and female nonfaculty members in 2000, 2004, and 2008. Conclusions: While we could not find any evidence that programs supported by the grants could increase female doctor numbers, these programs may have improved the status of female doctors with children. More intensive measures are needed to increase the number of women doctors in leadership positions.

Mentors' perspectives on the successes and challenges of mentoring in the COG Young Investigator mentorship program: A report from the Children's Oncology Group

BACKGROUND

Identification and development of young investigators (YI) is critical to the long-term success of research organizations. In 2004, the Children's Oncology Group (COG) created a mentorship program to foster the career development of YIs (faculty <10 years from initial appointment). This study sought to assess mentors' long-term assessment of this program.

PROCEDURE

In 2018, 101 past or current mentors in the COG YI mentorship program completed an online survey. Statistical comparisons were made with the Kruskal-Walis test.

RESULTS

The response rate was 74.2%. As some mentors had multiple mentees, we report on 138 total mentee-mentor pairs. Mentors were 57.4% male, and mentees were 39.1% male. Mentors rated being mentored as a YI as important with a median rating of 90 on a scale of 1-100, interquartile range (IQR) 80-100. Most mentors reported that being mentored themselves helped their own success within COG (78.2%) and with their overall career development (92.1%). Most mentors enjoyed serving in the program (72.3%) and the median success rating (on a scale of 1-100) across the mentor-mentee pairings was 75, IQR 39-90. Success ratings did not differ by mentor/mentee gender, but improved with increased frequency of mentor-mentee interactions (P < .001). Mentor-mentee pairs who set initial goals reported higher success ratings than those who did not (P < .001). Tangible successes included current mentee COG committee involvement (45.7%), ongoing mentor-mentee collaboration (53.6%), and co-authored manuscript publication (38.4%).

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that mentorship is important for successful professional development. Long-term mentoring success improves when mentors and mentees set goals upfront and meet frequently.

Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Women remain underrepresented in academic medicine, particularly in leadership positions. This lack of women in leadership has been shown to have negative implications for both patient care and educational outcomes. Similarly, the literature demonstrates that female physicians are less likely to have mentors, despite the proven benefits of mentorship for career advancement. The objective of this review is to identify and describe models of mentorship for women in academic medicine.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews following PRISMA guidelines in June 2017. We included original English language studies that described a mentorship program in the USA that involved academic medical doctorates and that were created for women or provided results stratified by gender.

RESULTS

Our search returned 3625 results; 3309 references remained after removal of duplicates. Twenty articles met inclusion criteria. The majority of the programs were designed for junior faculty and used the dyad model of mentoring (i.e., one mentor/one mentee). Frequently cited objectives of these programs were to improve scholarship, promotion, and retention of female faculty. Program evaluations were primarily survey-based, with participant-reported satisfaction being the most frequent measured outcome. Most results showed very high satisfaction. Gender concordance between mentor and mentee did not impact satisfaction. Eight articles reported objective outcomes, including publications, retention, and promotion, and each of these demonstrated an improvement after program implementation.

DISCUSSION

Our review suggests that mentorship programs designed for women, regardless of the model, are met with high satisfaction and can help promote and retain women in academic medicine. No clear best practices for mentorship emerged in the literature. Institutions, therefore, can individualize their mentorship programs and models to available resources and goals. These results demonstrate the importance of more widespread implementation of mentorship programs to more effectively facilitate professional development and success of women in academic medicine.

Long-term impact of a faculty mentoring program in academic medicine

The authors conducted a prospective longitudinal study from 2009 to 2016 to assess the short and long-term impact of a formal mentorship program on junior faculty satisfaction and productivity. Junior faculty mentees enrolled in the program and junior faculty without formal mentorship were administered surveys before and after the program to assess satisfaction with their mentoring experiences. Long-term retention, promotion, and funding data were also collected. Twenty-three junior faculty mentees and 91 junior faculty controls were included in the study. Mentees came from the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Management. After participating in the mentorship program, mentees demonstrated an increase in satisfaction from baseline in five of seven domains related to mentoring, while controls experienced no significant change in satisfaction in six of the seven domains. At long-term follow up, mentees were more likely than controls to hold senior faculty positions (percent senior faculty: 47% vs. 13%, p = 0.030) despite no difference in initial administrative rank. When comparing the subset of faculty who were Instructors at baseline, mentees were more likely to be funded and/or promoted than controls (p = 0.030). A majority of mentees reported that the program strengthened their long-term success, and many maintained their original mentoring relationships and formed new ones, highlighting the strong culture of mentorship that was instilled. Several short-term and long-term benefits were fostered from this formal mentorship program. These findings highlight the potential impact of mentorship programs in propagating a culture of mentorship and excellence.

Long-term evidence that a pediatric oncology mentorship program for young investigators is feasible and beneficial in the cooperative group setting: A report from the Children's Oncology Group

BACKGROUND

Mentorship of junior faculty is an integral component of career development. The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Young Investigator (YI) Committee designed a mentorship program in 2004 whose purpose was to pair YIs (faculty ≤10 years of first academic appointment) with a senior mentor to assist with career development and involvement in COG research activities. This study reports on the committee's ability to achieve these goals.

PROCEDURE

An online survey was sent to YIs who were registered with the program from 2004 to2015, assessing three major domains: (1) overall experience with the mentor pairing, (2) satisfaction with the program, and (3) academic accomplishments of the mentees.

RESULTS

The response rate was 64% (110/171). Overall, YIs rated the success of their mentorship pairing as 7.2 out of 10 (median) (25th, 75th quartile 3.6, 9.6). The direct effects of the mentorship program included 70% YIs reporting a positive effect on their career, 40% reporting any grant or manuscript resulting from the pairing, 47% forming a new research collaboration, and 43% receiving appointment to a COG committee. Respondents reported success in COG with 38% authoring a manuscript on behalf of COG and 65% reporting a leadership position including seven current or past COG discipline chairs and 20 study chairs. Finally, 74% of respondents said they would consider serving as mentors in the program in the future.

CONCLUSION

The COG YI mentorship program has been well received by the majority of the participants and has helped to identify and train many current leaders in COG.

Efficacy of an Interinstitutional Mentoring Program Within Pediatric Rheumatology

OBJECTIVE

The small size of many pediatric rheumatology programs translates into limited mentoring options for early career physicians. To address this problem, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) developed a subspecialty-wide interinstitutional mentoring program, the ACR/CARRA Mentoring Interest Group (AMIGO). We sought to assess the impact of this program on mentoring within pediatric rheumatology.

METHODS

In a longitudinal 3-year study, participant ratings from the AMIGO pilot program were compared with those after the program was opened to general enrollment. Access to mentoring as a function of career stage was assessed by surveys of the US and Canadian pediatric rheumatologists in 2011 and 2014, before and after implementation of AMIGO.

RESULTS

Participants in the pilot phase (19 dyads) and the general implementation phase (112 dyads) reported comparable success in establishing mentor contact, suitability of mentor-mentee pairing, and benefit with respect to career development, scholarship, and work-life balance. Community surveys showed that AMIGO participation as mentee was high among fellows (86%) and modest among junior faculty (31%). Implementation correlated with significant gains in breadth of mentorship and in overall satisfaction with mentoring for fellows but not junior faculty.

CONCLUSION

AMIGO is a career mentoring program that serves most fellows and many junior faculty in pediatric rheumatology across the US and Canada. Program evaluation data confirm that a subspecialty-wide interinstitutional mentoring program is feasible and can translate into concrete improvement in mentoring, measurable at the level of the whole professional community.

Early career mentoring through the American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology: Lessons learned from a pilot program

BACKGROUND

Effective networking and mentorship are critical determinants of career satisfaction and success in academic medicine. The American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (ASPHO) mentoring program was developed to support Early Career (EC) members. Herein, the authors report on the initial 2-year outcomes of this novel program.

PROCEDURE

Mentees selected mentors with expertise in different subspecialties within the field from mentor profiles at the ASPHO Web site. Of 23 enrolled pairs, 19 mentors and 16 mentees completed electronic program feedback evaluations. The authors analyzed data collected between February 2013 and December 2014. The authors used descriptive statistics for categorical data and thematic analysis for qualitative data.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 76% (35/46). At the initiation of the relationship, career development and research planning were the most commonly identified goals for both mentors and mentees. Participants communicated by phone, e-mail, or met in-person at ASPHO annual meetings. Most mentor-mentee pairs were satisfied with the mentoring relationship, considered it a rewarding experience that justified their time and effort, achieved their goals in a timely manner with objective work products, and planned to continue the relationship. However, time constraints and infrequent communications remained a challenge.

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in the ASPHO mentoring program suggests a clear benefit to a broad spectrum of ASPHO EC members with diverse personal and professional development needs. Efforts to expand the mentoring program are ongoing and focused on increasing enrollment of mentors to cover a wider diversity of career tracks/subspecialties and evaluating career and academic outcomes more objectively.

Mentorship in Radiology

Mentoring is an extremely important component of academic medicine, including radiology, yet it is not specifically emphasized in radiology training, and many academic radiology departments in the United States, Canada, and elsewhere do not have formal mentoring programs for medical students, residents, fellows, or junior faculty. The purpose of this article is to overview the current status of mentorship in radiology, to discuss the importance of mentorship at multiple levels and its potential benefits in particular, as well as how to conduct a successful mentor-mentee relationship. The literature on mentorship in radiology and in academic medicine in general is reviewed.

The Unwritten Rules of Mentorship: Facilitators of and Barriers to Effective Mentorship in Pediatric Hospital Medicine

OBJECTIVES

Benefits of effective mentorship include career satisfaction and academic productivity. Given the youth of pediatric hospital medicine (PHM), effective mentorship is a widely acknowledged challenge. This study aimed to characterize successful pediatric hospitalists' past and current mentorship experiences and identify facilitators of and barriers to effective mentorship in PHM.

METHODS

Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with peer-nominated pediatric hospitalists, exploring past and current mentorship experiences and approaches perceived to aid or hinder mentorship relationships from both the mentor and mentee perspectives. Interviews were recorded verbatim, professionally transcribed, and analyzed by using a general inductive approach.

RESULTS

Sixteen interviews were conducted and transcribed. Participants reported having a median of 3 mentors and 6 mentees. Three themes emerged regarding how mentors can optimize mentorship: (1) comprehensive focus on the mentee, (2) setting of clear expectations, and (3) acknowledgment of mentors' limitations. Five themes emerged regarding how mentees can optimize mentorship: (1) preparation, (2) proactivity, (3) continual reevaluation of relationships, (4) willingness to seek mentorship outside of common venues, and (5) building of a mentorship team. Major barriers to effective mentorship included (1) mismatched expectations between mentor and mentee, (2) lack of available mentors in PHM, (3) lack of time/compensation for PHM mentors, and (4) geographic separation between mentor and mentee.

CONCLUSIONS

Several themes emerged regarding facilitators of and barriers to effective mentorship in PHM. These "unwritten rules of mentorship" may serve as a guide to establish and maintain beneficial mentorship relationships and overcome challenges.

Exploring the Linkage Between the Components of Motivational Systems Theory and Career Decisiveness

This study examined the role of individual and contextual factors in the development of career optimism, which leads to career decisiveness using motivational systems theory (MST). The study was conducted by adopting a longitudinal study design using responses from 254 management students in India. Results of structural equation modeling analyses suggested that the hypothesized model adequately fit the data. Career optimism mediated the relationship between each of the components of MST (goal, capability beliefs, context beliefs, and emotions) and career decisiveness except goals. Career optimism partially mediated the relationship between goals and career decisiveness. Furthermore, results indicated that none of the demographic variables (age, gender, qualification, and academic background) had any effect on either career optimism or career decisiveness.

Standing on the shoulders of giants: results from the Radiation Oncology Academic Development and Mentorship Assessment Project (ROADMAP)

PURPOSE

To analyze survey information regarding mentorship practices and cross-correlate the results with objective metrics of academic productivity among academic radiation oncologists at US Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited residency training programs.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

An institutional review board-approved survey for the Radiation Oncology Academic Development and Mentorship Assessment Project (ROADMAP) was sent to 1031 radiation oncologists employed at an ACGME-accredited residency training program and administered using an international secure web application designed exclusively to support data capture for research studies. Data collected included demographics, presence of mentorship, and the nature of specific mentoring activities. Productivity metrics, including number of publications, number of citations, h-index, and date of first publication, were collected for each survey respondent from a commercially available online database, and m-index was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 158 academic radiation oncologists completed the survey, 96 of whom reported having an academic/scientific mentor. Faculty with a mentor had higher numbers of publications, citations, and h- and m-indices. Differences in gender and race/ethnicity were not associated with significant differences in mentorship rates, but those with a mentor were more likely to have a PhD degree and were more likely to have more time protected for research. Bivariate fit regression modeling showed a positive correlation between a mentor's h-index and their mentee's h-index (R2=0.16; P<.001). Linear regression also showed significant correlates of higher h-index, in addition to having a mentor (P=.001), included a longer career duration (P<.001) and fewer patients in treatment (P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Mentorship is widely believed to be important to career development and academic productivity. These results emphasize the importance of identifying and striving to overcome potential barriers to effective mentorship.