The Munich-Evaluation-of-Mentoring-Questionnaire (MEMeQ)--a novel instrument for evaluating protégés' satisfaction with mentoring relationships in medical education

SPARK mentorship program for emergency services assistants underrepresented in medicine interested in physician assistant programs

Background

Increasing diversity in the health care workforce has been shown to improve patient health care and create psychological safety for employees who feel marginalized and underrepresented. While several measures exist for increasing racial and ethnic diversity in the physician workforce, few programs target expanding representation among physician assistants (PAs). Despite increasing the role and responsibility of PAs in the emergency department (ED), there remains a significant lack of diversity within this group. The SPARK mentorship program, a combined mentorship and educational opportunity for emergency services assistants (ESAs; also called aides and technicians) who are underrepresented in medicine (UiM), may create a pathway to recruiting diverse individuals to PA careers in emergency medicine.

Methods

Our goal was to implement and evaluate a combined didactic and mentorship curriculum focused on recruiting ESAs UIM to become PAs in the ED. Using Kern's framework, an interprofessional group created a 3-month mentorship program including individualized mentorship from senior PAs, didactic content covering the roles of PAs in the ED, and strategies to apply to PA school. This curriculum was implemented in 2022 for five ESAs following an application process. Outcomes were measured using the NIH Mentoring Evaluation Form and Munich Evaluation of Mentoring Questionnaire as well as longitudinal monitoring after the program to determine progress of ESAs toward a career as PAs.

Results

All five mentees completed the mentorship program. Postprogram surveys showed all participants described the program as meeting their expectations and being goal oriented. One-year follow-up demonstrated progress in all participants along their desired career path.

Conclusions

The SPARK mentorship program appears to be a feasible approach to creating a pathway for recruitment of ESAs UIM into the PA profession. Preliminary outcome data suggest that this curriculum was highly acceptable to participants and may have a positive impact on recruiting ESAs to become PAs. Continued evaluation is needed to determine what effect programs such as this one have on increasing diversity in the PA workforce.

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.

Utilizing Complexity Leadership Theory to Promote Faculty Mentorship and Resident Leadership

OBJECTIVE

To create and evaluate a structured combined faculty mentorship/resident leadership program based on complexity leadership theory.

DESIGN

In 2021, a logic model was used to create a 5 part bi-monthly resident leadership series utilizing administrative, adaptive, and enabling components of complexity leadership theory. Each of the 5 sessions had a nationally prominent senior faculty member mentor 3 junior faculty in creation of an interactive workshop that was delivered to resident physicians during scheduled didactics. Validated surveys were used to assess faculty post-mentorship experience and resident self-perception of leadership skills pre-and post-series. Descriptive statistics and 2-way ANOVA were performed; text comments underwent content analysis.

SETTING

A large academic OB/GYN department at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

PARTICIPANTS

Five faculty mentors, 15 junior faculty, and 48 residents participated in this program. All faculty mentors (5/5) and 87% (13/15) of mentees completed the post-mentorship survey. Resident response rate was 60% (29/48) pre-series and 63% (30/48) post-series.

RESULTS

Both mentors and mentees rated the experience favorably (4.62 versus 5.29, p = 0.51). In open-ended comments, enabling components of mentorship process, such as approachability and expertise of the mentors, were most often noted as positive. Both mentees and mentors suggested administrative changes to the experience, such as longitudinal relationships between mentors and mentees. The mean score on the resident leadership questionnaire improved from 3.82 to 3.96 (5-point Likert scale, p = 0.30) with self-reported leadership skills improving in 8/9 domains, although none reaching statistical significance. Open-ended comments revealed that residents also most desired administrative changes in the leadership series, such as increased leadership opportunities and more interactive workshops.

CONCLUSIONS

A structured combined faculty mentorship/resident leadership program formed utilizing complexity leadership theory was positively received. Participants most liked the enabling components of the series, with requested administrative changes in the future.

Internal Consistency and Application of a Mentee Survey to Assess Mentor Competencies in an Academic Medical Center across Demographic Groups

The National Academies of Science stresses the importance of research mentoring. We assessed the internal consistency and application of a novel 33 item mentor evaluation survey and explored differences across subgroups. The survey was administered annually to mentees. The response rate was 17.8% for a sample of 710 respondents. The survey exhibited strong internal validity with Cronbach Alpha > 0.89 for each subscale. Overall scores across the three domains were high. Basic Science trainees scored their mentor significantly lower than those in Translational or Clinical Science across domains (0.11-0.25 points). Underrepresented Racial Ethnic Groups (UREG) trainee scores were significantly lower in academic guidance and personal communication. Women had lower scores in 4 out of 5 domains. The survey is a modified instrument to assess mentee experience, although further validation against mentee outcomes is needed.

Professional development through mentoring: Final evaluation of the pilot mentoring programme of the European society of radiotherapy and oncology

The European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) organized a one-year pilot mentoring programme. At evaluation after one year, both mentors and mentees scored the programme with a median score of 9 on a scale of 10. All of the mentors indicated that they wanted to participate again as mentors.

Feasibility and acceptability of a primary care mentoring programme for undergraduate students

Mentoring plays a crucial role in increasing the attractiveness of primary care careers for medical students. Based on a literature review and structured group discussions, the authors developed a primary care mentoring platform centred on undergraduate medical students' needs. All second- to sixth-year students were invited to enrol into the programme by choosing a mentor from an online platform, which was pilot tested during one academic year (2021-2022) with 16 mentors. Fifteen mentees enrolled into the pilot programme. The evaluation assessed the procedures' feasibility as well as the student-centeredness and acceptability of the programme. Mentees completed a quantitative survey evaluating satisfaction and the mentoring relationship's personal and content aspects. Mentors' feedback was collected during focus groups discussing the programme's acceptability and practical aspects. Both mentees and mentors expressed high levels of satisfaction with the programme. Mentees rated their mentoring relationships highly across most aspects. Mentees' content-related needs included postgraduate training, meeting an inspiring person, work-life balance, and questions about running a private practice. Mentors described the programme as a rewarding experience. They enjoyed the flexible structure that allowed them to adapt to the mentees' individual needs. Maintaining the relationship was mostly the mentors' responsibility. Further structured guidance from the programme coordinators was identified as potentially beneficial for future implementation. The findings highlight the feasibility and the advantages of a flexible, student-centred mentoring programme. The programme attracted students interested in primary care from all levels of undergraduate education. Such programmes may contribute to fostering students' interest in primary care careers.

Tailored Mentorship for the Underrepresented and Allies in Radiation Oncology: The Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee Mentorship Experience

PURPOSE

There are limited opportunities for mentorship for underrepresented in medicine (URM) trainees and physicians in radiation oncology (RO). The purpose of this study was to create and evaluate a formal mentorship program open to URMs and allies with interests in diversity, equity, and inclusion.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A mentorship program incorporating a virtual platform was designed by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee. It was structured to include 6 sessions over 6 months with matched mentor-mentee pairs based on responses to a publicized online interest form. A compilation of evidence-based guidelines was provided to optimize the mentorship relationship. Linked pre- and postprogram surveys were administered to collect demographic data, define baseline goals and level of support, and evaluate program satisfaction.

RESULTS

Thirty-five mentor-mentee pairs were matched; 31 mentees completed the preprogram survey and 17 completed the postprogram survey. Preprogram, only 3 mentees (9.7%) reported satisfaction with current mentorship and 5 (16%) reported mechanisms or mentorship in place at their program to support URMs. On the postprogram survey, mentees reported high satisfaction with areas of mentorship, mentor attributes, and the program overall. Opportunities for improvement include implementation of mechanisms to enhance communication with mentor-mentee pairs and maintain longitudinal engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first tailored mentorship program in RO for URMs and those with diversity, equity, and inclusion interests, our results demonstrate that there is self-reported interest for better mentorship for URMs in RO, and that a nationwide structured mentorship program can address participants' goals with high satisfaction. Program expansion could provide URMs and allies in RO more opportunities for career development and promote a greater sense of community and inclusion within the field.

MatricS-A novel tool for monitoring professional role development in surgical disciplines

Introduction

Mentoring is an effective method for human resource development. Monitoring the process is important for individual mentee/mentor pairs as well as for program directors. Due to individual personality differences of both mentees and mentors and their respective interactions, it is challenging to monitor the individual development process of mentees in a structured manner. This study investigates to what extent a novel instrument, the mentee-based assessment tool for role development of interpersonal competencies in surgical professions (MatricS) can adequately monitor the professional role development process of residents during an established mentoring program.

Material and methods

In a prospective longitudinal study, the competence development of 31 mentees in two subsequent cohorts was assessed by a modified role matrix based on Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists. The evaluation focused on three defined roles (D, developer; N, networker; M, multiplicator) at three levels (private, employer-related, national/international) with four stages of development. For validation of mentee self-assessments, the assessments of the respective mentors were recorded alongside. For correlation analyses, Pearson coefficients were calculated, pre-post-comparisons were done by paired t-tests; significance was assumed at p < 0.05, respectively.

Results

Mentee self-assessments overall correlated well with the objective mentor assessments (Pearson's r 0.8, p < 0.001). Significant correlations of this magnitude were found for both individual cohorts as well as for all individual roles. The mentees acquired competencies in all roles indicated by significant increases of corresponding MatricS scores. The largest competency gains (mean ± SD) were found in the role D (start: 1.30 ± 0.77, end: 2.13 ± 0.83, p < 0.001). The majority of mentees achieved the prespecified target competency level in >75% of all roles and levels.

Conclusion

The role development process during mentoring can be reliably monitored by using MatricS. MatricS scores highly correlate between mentees and mentors, indicating that mentee self-assessments are suitable and sufficient for monitoring. These findings help to lessen the work burden on senior surgeons and thus can help to increase the acceptance of mentoring programs in surgical disciplines.

A Better Learning Community: Mixed-Methods Reveal Medical Student Preferences with Implications for Learning Community Design and Implementation

BACKGROUND

Medical school learning communities benefit students. The College of Medicine (COM) at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) provides medical students with academic, professional, and personal support through a learning community (LC) made of 7 academic houses.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the academic house model at UAMS utilizing a mixed-methods survey. The aims were to: (1) assess student experience and satisfaction with academic houses, (2) describe the realms of advising and guidance, and (3) identify areas for improvement.

METHOD

An online survey was assigned to 723 COM students (all students enrolled, first through fourth years) at UAMS in March 2019. The survey was comprised of 25 items (10 multiple-choice, 8 on the Likert scale, and 7 open-ended questions). Data was depicted using frequency and percentages and/or thematic review of free-form responses.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 31% (227 students). The majority of students responding (132, 58.1%) attended 2 or more face-to-face meetings with the faculty advisor within the preceding year. However, 27 (11.9%) students did not have any meetings. Approximately two-thirds of the respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the guidance and direction provided by their advisors [very satisfied (n = 83; 36.6%); satisfied (n = 77; 33.9%)]. Themes that emerged from student generated areas for improvement include time constraints, advisor/advisee interest mismatch, and perceived inadequacy of advising content/connections.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the effectiveness of the LC model for advising and mentoring in the COM at UAMS. Uniquely, this study identifies not only learners' satisfaction with their LC but also highlights areas for improvement which are widely generalizable and important to consider for institutions with or planning to start an LC.

[Mentoring in urological postgraduate training : Use of a competence matrix for the evaluation of results]

OBJECTIVES

For the professional development of junior employees, sufficient competence is decisive for their career. The mentoring programme Urology Roadmap provides residents career planning in various roles (junior staff member, developer, networker, multiplier). To date, no data are available on the extent to which the role matrix instrument is suitable as a competence matrix for evaluating results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective longitudinal study, the competence development of 21 mentees was recorded by their mentors in a validated questionnaire (The Munich Evaluation of Mentoring Questionnaire, MEMeQ). A modified role matrix based on CanMEDs (Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists) was used as an assessment tool. The focus of the evaluation was on four defined roles at three levels (private, employer-related, (inter)national) with four development stages.

RESULTS

The highest level of satisfaction was found for the aspect "successful design of the career path" (93%) and the lowest was found for the aspect "facilitation of everyday working life" (67%). In all, 93% recommend participation. The mentees achieved significant increases in competence in all four roles. The highest level of competence was found in the role of junior employee (m_start 1.3 ± 0.7, m_end 2.4 ± 0.7, p < 0.001), followed by developer (m_start 1.2 ± 0.8, m_end 2.2 ± 0.7, p < 0.001) and networker (m_start 1.3 ± 0.7, m_end 2.1 ± 0.6, p < 0.001). Of the mentees, 54% were able to achieve the target competence level 2 in more than 90% of all roles and levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The instrument role matrix is suitable to objectively evaluate the results of the mentoring programme and reflects the state of personnel development.

A systematic scoping review of ethical issues in mentoring in medical schools

BACKGROUND

Mentoring provides mentees and mentors with holistic support and research opportunities. Yet, the quality of this support has been called into question amidst suggestions that mentoring is prone to bullying and professional lapses. These concerns jeopardise mentoring's role in medical schools and demand closer scrutiny.

METHODS

To better understand prevailing concerns, a novel approach to systematic scoping reviews (SSR) s is proposed to map prevailing ethical issues in mentoring in an accountable and reproducible manner. Ten members of the research team carried out systematic and independent searches of PubMed, Embase, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Scopus, OpenGrey and Mednar databases. The individual researchers employed 'negotiated consensual validation' to determine the final list of articles to be analysed. The reviewers worked in three independent teams. One team summarised the included articles. The other teams employed independent thematic and content analysis respectively. The findings of the three approaches were compared. The themes from non-evidence based and grey literature were also compared with themes from research driven data.

RESULTS

Four thousand six titles were reviewed and 51 full text articles were included. Findings from thematic and content analyses were similar and reflected the tabulated summaries. The themes/categories identified were ethical concerns, predisposing factors and possible solutions at the mentor and mentee, mentoring relationship and/or host organisation level. Ethical concerns were found to stem from issues such as power differentials and lack of motivation whilst predisposing factors comprised of the mentor's lack of experience and personality conflicts. Possible solutions include better program oversight and the fostering of an effective mentoring environment.

CONCLUSIONS

This structured SSR found that ethical issues in mentoring occur as a result of inconducive mentoring environments. As such, further studies and systematic reviews of mentoring structures, cultures and remediation must follow so as to guide host organisations in their endeavour to improve mentoring in medical schools.

A new Mentor Evaluation Tool: Evidence of validity

Background

Mentorship plays an essential role in enhancing the success of junior faculty. Previous evaluation tools focused on specific types of mentors or mentees. The main objective was to develop and provide validity evidence for a Mentor Evaluation Tool (MET) to assess the effectiveness of one-on-one mentoring for faculty in the academic health sciences.

Methods

Evidence was collected for the validity domains of content, internal structure and relationship to other variables. The 13 item MET was tested for internal structure evidence with 185 junior faculty from Schools of Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy. Finally, the MET was studied for additional validity evidence by prospectively enrolling mentees of three different groups of faculty (faculty nominated for, or winners of, a lifetime achievement in mentoring award; faculty graduates of a mentor training program; and faculty mentors not in either of the other two groups) at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) and asking them to rate their mentors using the MET. Mentors and mentees were clinicians, educators and/or researchers.

Results

The 13 MET items mapped well to the five mentoring domains and six competencies described in the literature. The standardized Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was 0.96. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a single factor (CFI = 0.89, SRMR = 0.05). The three mentor groups did not differ in the single overall assessment item (P = 0.054) or mean MET score (P = 0.288), before or after adjusting for years of mentoring. The mentorship score means were relatively high for all three groups.

Conclusions

The Mentor Evaluation Tool demonstrates evidence of validity for research, clinical, educational or career mentors in academic health science careers. However, MET did not distinguish individuals nominated as outstanding mentors from other mentors. MET validity evidence can be studied further with mentor-mentee pairs and to follow prospectively the rating of mentors before and after a mentorship training program.

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.

A systematic scoping review of ethical issues in mentoring in internal medicine, family medicine and academic medicine

Mentoring's role in medical education is threatened by the potential abuse of mentoring relationships. Particularly affected are mentoring relationships between senior clinicians and junior doctors which lie at the heart of mentoring. To better understand and address these concerns, a systematic scoping review into prevailing accounts of ethical issues and professional lapses in mentoring is undertaken. Arksey and O'Malley's (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19-32, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was employed to explore the scope of ethical concerns in mentoring in general medicine. Databases searcheed included PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, Embase, Scopus, Mednar and OpenGrey. 3391 abstracts were identified from the initialy search after removal of duplicates, 412 full-text articles were reviewed, 98 articles were included and thematically analysed. Unsatisfactory matching, misaligned expectations, inadequate mentor training, cursory codes of conduct, sketchy standards of practice, meagre oversight and unstructured processes have been identified as potential causes for ethical and professional breaches in mentoring practice. Changes in how professionalism is viewed suggest further studies of educational culture should also be carried out. The host organization plays a major role in establishing codes of conduct, expectations, and holistically, longitudinally oversight of the mentoring process and mentoring relationships.

Enhancing Mentoring in Palliative Care: An Evidence Based Mentoring Framework

BACKGROUND

Growing concerns over ethical issues in mentoring in medicine and surgery have hindered efforts to reinitiate mentoring for Palliative Care (PC) physicians following the easing of COVID-19 restrictions. Ranging from the misappropriation of mentee's work to bullying, ethical issues in mentoring are attributed to poor understanding and structuring of mentoring programs, underlining the need for a consistent approach to mentoring practices.

METHODS

Given diverse practices across different settings and the employ of various methodologies, a novel approach to narrative reviews (NR)s is proposed to summarize, interpret, and critique prevailing data on novice mentoring. To overcome prevailing concerns surrounding the reproducibility and transparency of narrative reviews, the Systematic Evidenced Based Approach (SEBA) adopts a structured approach to searching and summarizing the included articles and employed concurrent content and thematic analysis that was overseen by a team of experts.

RESULTS

A total of 18 915 abstracts were reviewed, 62 full text articles evaluated and 41 articles included. Ten themes/categories were ascertained identified including Nature; Stakeholders; Relationship; Approach; Environment; Benefits; Barriers; Assessments; Theories and Definitions.

CONCLUSION

By compiling and scrutinizing prevailing practice it is possible to appreciate the notion of the mentoring ecosystem which sees each mentee, mentor, and host organization brings with them their own microenvironment that contains their respective goals, abilities, and contextual considerations. Built around competency based mentoring stages, it is possible to advance a flexible yet consistent novice mentoring framework.

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.

The Impact of Formal Mentorship Programs on Mentorship Experience Among Radiation Oncology Residents From the Northeast

Purpose: Strong mentorship has been shown to improve mentee productivity, clinical skills, medical knowledge, and career preparation. We conducted a survey to evaluate resident satisfaction with mentorship within their radiation oncology residency programs. Methods and Materials: In January 2019, 126 radiation oncology residents training at programs in the northeastern United States were asked to anonymously complete the validated Munich Evaluation of Mentoring Questionnaire (MEMeQ). Results of residents with a formal mentoring program were compared to those without a formal program. Results: Overall response rate was 42%(n = 53). Participants were 25% post-graduate year two (PGY-2), 21% PGY-3, 26% PGY-4, and 28% PGY-5. Only 38% of residents reported participation in a formal mentoring program, while 62% had no formal program, and 13% reported having no mentor at all. Residents participating in a formal mentoring program reported strikingly higher rates of overall satisfaction with mentoring compared to those who were not (90% vs. 9%, p < 0.001). Overall, 38% of residents were either satisfied/very satisfied with their mentoring experience, while 49% of residents were unsatisfied/very unsatisfied. Conclusion: Residents participating in a formal mentorship program are significantly more likely to be satisfied with their mentoring experience than those who are not. Our results suggest that radiation oncology residency programs should strongly consider implementing formal mentorship programs.

Development and initial validation of a dual-purpose questionnaire capturing mentors' and mentees' perceptions and expectations of the mentoring process

BACKGROUND

In health profession education, learners are often coached by mentors for development of competencies, self-direction of learning and professionalism. It is important that the mentee-mentor relationship is aligned in terms of mutual expectations.

METHODS

A dual-purpose questionnaire capturing both the mentor and mentee perceptions on the actual and preferred mentoring functions was designed and validated, by performing a principal component analysis (PCA) using the data of mentees (n = 103) and mentors (n = 23) of a medical course. As a proof of concept, alignment of needs and changes in the mentoring perceptions in mentee groups of different years were determined.

RESULTS

PCA showed that specific sets of questions addressed important elements in the mentoring process, such as self-direction of learning and reflection (Scale 1), guidance of behavioural change (Scale 4), addressing personal issues and professional identity development (Scale 3 and 5) and how the mentor and mentee presents oneself in the mentoring relationship (Scale 2). Mentors and mentees perceived comparable situations as critical for an effective mentoring process, such as mentor presence and guidance of reflection, although there was also evidence of gaps, such as perception of cultural issues. By comparison of the mentee groups in the different years of the program, the dynamic or evolving nature of the mentor process became evident, mentees experienced more emphasis by the mentor on reflection (Scale 1), at a constant level of mentor presence (Scale 2).

CONCLUSION

Given the individualized, context-specific, and dynamic nature of mentoring, programmes would benefit from a regular evaluation of mentoring practices, e.g. by using questionnaires, in order to facilitate organizational revisions and further development of the mentoring competencies.

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.

A prospective, randomised trial of different matching procedures for structured mentoring programmes in medical education

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous formation of mentoring relationships can be seen as the gold standard in mentoring. Unfortunately, it happens very infrequently. The purpose of structured mentoring programmes is to facilitate the formation of mentoring relationships. This remains a challenging task, especially for large institutions.

AIMS

We set out to investigate and compare three methods of matchmaking in the setting of our structured mentoring programme. In a prospective, randomised trial we compared personal matching (PM) by an experienced expert to two different electronic data processing (EDP)-supported matching procedures: "online algorithm" (OA) versus "online search" (OS).

METHODS

PM was performed after structured interviews of prospective protégés by one founder of our mentoring programme. The OA provides students with a choice of 10 potential mentors based on comparison of online profiles. OS lets students filter and search through all available mentor profiles. One hundred and ninty medical students were randomised into the three groups. One year later, we evaluated the endpoints 1. "establishment of a mentoring relationship" and 2. "satisfaction with the mentoring relationship". Satisfaction with the mentoring relationship was assessed using Munich-Evaluation-of-Mentoring-Questionnaire (MEMeQ).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five out of the 190 study participants found a mentor. With regards to endpoint one we found an advantage of PM compared to both EDP-supported matching procedures. There was no significant difference between OA and OS. Concerning endpoint two the differences between the investigated matching procedures were not significant.

CONCLUSION

PM is superior as to the number of mentoring relationships formed per participating student compared to EDP-supported methods. In our data, there was no significant difference in the level of satisfaction. Considering the high investments associated with PM of mentors and protégés, EDP-supported matching procedures seem a viable compromise between effectiveness and efficiency especially for large-scale structured mentoring programmes in medical education.