Evaluating Academic Mentorship Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Country Institutions: Proposed Framework and Metrics

Optimizing a mentorship program from the perspective of academic medicine leadership - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Effective mentorship is an important contributor to academic success. Given the critical role of leadership in fostering mentorship, this study sought to explore the perspectives of departmental leadership regarding 1) current departmental mentorship processes; and 2) crucial components of a mentorship program that would enhance the effectiveness of mentorship.

METHODS

Department Division Directors (DDDs), Vice-Chairs, and Mentorship Facilitators from the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine were interviewed between April and December 2021 using a semi-structured guide. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, then coded. Analysis occurred in 2 steps: 1) codes were organized to identify emergent themes; then 2) the Social Ecological Model (SEM) was applied to interpret the findings.

RESULTS

Nineteen interviews (14 DDDs, 3 Vice-Chairs, and 2 Mentorship Facilitator) were completed. Analysis revealed three themes: (1) a culture of mentorship permeated the department as evidenced by rigorous mentorship processes, divisional mentorship innovations, and faculty that were keen to mentor; (2) barriers to the establishment of effective mentoring relationships existed at 3 levels: departmental, interpersonal (mentee-mentor relationships), and mentee; and (3) strengthening the culture of mentorship could entail scaling up pre-existing mentorship processes and promoting faculty engagement. Application of SEM highlighted critical program features and determined that two components of interventions (creating tools to measure mentorship outcomes and systems for mentor recognition) were potential enablers of success.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing 'mentorship outcome measures' can incentivize and maintain relationships. By tangibly delineating departmental expectations for mentorship and creating systems that recognize mentors, these measures can contribute to a culture of mentorship.

Building Equitable Neuroscience Research Collaborations in Resource-limited Settings

The burden of noncommunicable neurological disorders, such as stroke, dementia, and headache disorders, are on the rise in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), while neuroinfectious diseases remain a major concern. The development of neuroscience research aimed at defining the burden of neurological diseases across the lifespan, as well as optimizing diagnosis and treatment strategies, is fundamental to improving neurological health in resource-limited settings. One of the key factors to advancing neuroscience research in LMICs is the establishment of effective collaborations based on responsible and trustworthy partnerships between local scientists in LMICs and international collaborators. LMIC researchers face many logistical, institutional, and individual level challenges as they embark on their neuroscience research journey. Despite these challenges, there are opportunities for improving LMIC investigator-led research that should focus on human and institutional infrastructure development. With regard to human capacity building, potential areas for offering support include enhancing research methodology training, offering instruction in manuscript and grant-writing, institutionalizing mentorship programs, and providing opportunities to conduct funded, mentored research to disseminate in high-impact journals. The foundational elements required for implementing and optimizing neuroscience research within an institution include an institutional review board, mentorship programs, data management, research administration, and laboratory facilities. This institutional capacity varies significantly across and within countries, and many rely on collaborations with better-resourced institutions to initiate research. Successful equitable collaborations ensure the engagement of all local and international stakeholders, as well as implementation of a self-sustaining long-term program. Building research capacity in LMICs is an essential endeavor that requires ongoing commitment to training independent scientists. As research capacity increases, LMIC institutions and governments should consider developing competitive research grant programs to support innovative studies led by local researchers, foster regional collaborations, and hence create a sustainable and independent neuroscience research environment.

Twelve Tips to Succeed as Health Profession Clinical Educator in Resource-Limited Settings

Health professions education is one of the pillars of academic medicine; however, clinical educators often lack the appropriate resources to succeed in this field. Examples of these challenges include: lack of support for faculty development, mentorship, and high cost of resources, when available. In addition, challenges such as the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic can affect healthcare personnel who are already struggling to provide adequate patient care while attempting to succeed in the role of educator and supervisor of trainees. Clinical educators face more challenges particularly in low-middle income countries as the limitations are more prominent and become key barriers to success. Similarly, due to COVID-19, these challenges can be far more evident in disadvantaged geographical, economic, and academic environments even in the United States. Herein, in this perspective paper, we define resource-limited settings in medical education, provide an overview of the most common barriers to career development as a clinical educator, and offer practical strategies to overcome some of these shortcomings.

Health research mentorship in low-income and middle-income countries: a global qualitative evidence synthesis of data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating mentorship in health research resource-limited settings. WHO/TDR Global commissioned a group to develop a practical guide on research mentorship. This global qualitative evidence synthesis included data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review to identify and propose strategies to enhance research mentorship in low/middle-income country (LMIC) institutions.

METHODS

The crowdsourcing open call used methods recommended by WHO/TDR and solicited descriptions of strategies to enhance research mentorship in LMICs. The scoping review used the Cochrane Handbook and predefined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing health research mentorship in LMICs. Textual data describing research mentorship strategies from the open call and studies from the scoping review were coded into themes. The quality of evidence supporting themes was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.

RESULTS

The open call solicited 46 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 77 studies. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognising mentorship as an institutional responsibility that should be provided and expected from all team members (8 strategies, 15 studies; moderate confidence); leveraging existing research and training resources to enhance research mentorship (15 strategies, 49 studies; moderate confidence); digital tools to match mentors and mentees and sustain mentorship relations over time (14 strategies, 11 studies; low confidence); nurturing a culture of generosity so that people who receive mentorship then become mentors to others (7 strategies, 7 studies; low confidence); peer mentorship defined as informal and formal support from one researcher to another who is at a similar career stage (16 strategies, 12 studies; low confidence).

INTERPRETATION

Research mentorship is a collective institutional responsibility, and it can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions by leveraging already existing resources. The evidence from the crowdsourcing open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. There is a need for more formal research mentorship programmes in LMIC institutions.

Support, networks, and relationships: Findings from a mixed-methods evaluation of a mentorship programme for early career women researchers in sexual and reproductive health and rights

Low research output among women researchers in health research has been linked to inadequate mentorship opportunities for early career women researchers and particularly in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) field. Mentorship has been recognized as a contributor to strengthening research capacity and as beneficial for both mentors and mentees. Women researchers oftentimes experience negative impacts of organizational and structural gender inequities related to formal and informal mentoring. In 2020, the UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction at WHO launched a mentorship programme for early career SRHR women researchers from low- and middle-income countries. The programme sought to provide professional skill-building, promote and share networking opportunities, and offer support in navigating personal and professional life. We conducted a convergent parallel mixed-methods evaluation of the 2020 pilot programme, which included 26 participants, through an online survey and semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs). Data collection occurred between March and May 2022. Nineteen responded to the online survey (12 mentees, 7 mentors) and 11 IDIs (7 mentees, 4 mentors) were completed. Based on a preliminary framework, we used deductive and inductive methods to identify six themes: views on mentorship; reasons for applying and expectations of participation in the programme; preferred aspects of programme implementation; challenges with the programme implementation; perceived lasting benefits of the programme; and recommendations for improvement. All participants found the initial training useful, most discussed work-life prioritization throughout the mentorship relationship, and most planned to continue with the relationship. There appear to be ample benefits to mentorship, especially when planned and implemented in a structured manner. These attributes can be particularly beneficial when they are conceived as a two-way relationship of mutual learning and support, and especially for women at the start of their research careers as they navigate structural gender inequities.

Health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to explore and synthesize the available literature on health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is broadly considered a useful strategy to improve research capacities and research outputs. Existing literature and guidance on research mentorship have focused on high-income countries and assumed resource-rich environments. Despite the successful endeavors to improve health research capacity in LMICs, the strategies that work best under different circumstances are poorly understood. There is a need to map and understand the evidence on health research mentorship in the context of LMICs.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Sources that reported existing practices, barriers, and mitigation strategies related to health research mentorship in LMICs were included.

METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies and reports written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. The search strategy was not limited by search dates and the last search was conducted on January 28, 2022. The databases searched included MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and JBI Evidence Synthesis . We also searched for gray literature in a selection of websites and digital repositories. The JBI scoping review methodology was used.

RESULTS

A total of 77 studies and reports were included in the review. The majority of the papers were from Africa (n=28). Others were from the Americas (n=7), South East Asia (n=4), East Mediterranean (n=2), and Western Pacific (n=2). The remaining studies were from LMICs that included at least 2 regional offices. Most of the mentorship projects (n=55) were initiated and funded by institutions from high-income countries. The first authors of 41 papers were primarily affiliated with LMICs. The findings were categorized under a description of research mentorship practices, barriers related to research mentorship, and suggested mitigation strategies. Deliverable-driven training using intensive hands-on mentorship and ongoing peer mentorship programs were some of the non-regular, non-institutionalized approaches used to improve research capacity for junior researchers in LMICs. None of the included papers focused on institutional components of research mentorship in LMICs. The barriers to research mentorship activities in LMICs included lack of clarity on mentorship, cultural variations, unbalanced power dynamics, socio-political influences, language barriers, lack of experienced mentors, and limited local funding. Institutionalizing research mentorship, adapting mentoring methodologies relying on local resources, and addressing and respecting diversity in mentorship programs were among the main strategies identified to effectively implement research mentorship in LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

Research mentorship initiatives and practices are limited in LMICs. Few available practices have been introduced by researchers and research institutions from high-income countries and those that have are not yet institutionalized. The identified existing practices, barriers, and facilitators on health research mentorship could help the design, implementation, and evaluation of programs to institutionalize health research mentorship in LMICs.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework osf.io/jqa9z/.

SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT

A Spanish-language version of the abstract of this review is available as supplemental digital content: http://links.lww.com/SRX/A32.

Seeds of trust ripe as luscious fruits: Faculty mentorship forum at Aga Khan University Medical College

Background & Objective

Faculty members require mentoring in all stages of their professional development. Aga Khan University (AKU) has initiated mentorship programs for students and faculty at AKU Medical College (AKU- MC) and AKU School of Nursing and Midwifery (AKU-SONAM). This study aimed to explore perceptions of mentors, mentees, administrators (chairs, co-chairs, founder members and coordinators of the mentoring program) and leadership and further investigate the strengths and challenges faced by 'Faculty Mentorship Program' at AKU- MC.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative exploratory study from February till December 2021 after approval from AKU using purposive criterion sampling. Mentors, mentees, administrators and dean of AKU- MC were included in the study. The interview guide was developed, validated and reviewed by experts. After piloting, four focused group discussions and 8 in-depth interviews were conducted in AKU- MC.

Results

The findings described the transition from informal to formal mentorship, identified challenges faced by mentors and mentees and suggested the role of leadership / administrators. The themes identified were "Continuous improvement of mentoring practices", "Building strong foundations for mentoring relationships", and "Growth and development through challenging experiences".

Conclusion

The faculty mentorship program at AKU-MC was in line with the goals and vision of the institution. All participants identified the need of additional resources, administrative support, rewards, incentives and recognition of mentors for sustainability of the program.

Elevating Mentorship Competency for Sustained Impact via the University of Zambia Mentor Training Program

The University of Zambia (UNZA) Mentor Training Program is conducted annually to strengthen the mentorship capacity of postgraduate programs for the health professions. This intensive five-session course trains faculty members in the mentorship of students. Established by senior UNZA leaders and US-based collaborators, this program was designed to address gaps in mentorship identified at the institutional level. Faculty facilitators developed the course curriculum and used a train-the-trainer model to ensure program sustainability. Participants were faculty members who mentor PhD and Master of Medicine students. To assess the program's impact, mentors and their mentees completed questionnaires on the mentor's mentoring competencies at the end of the course and 1 year later. Competency scores were compared longitudinally to quantify potential changes in mentoring behaviors. Mentors and mentees alike noted mentor growth in all competency domains from postcourse to 1 year later, providing evidence of a trend toward improvement in mentorship and that the program may have sustainable and positive effects on mentoring behaviors over time. Salient areas of growth corresponded to emphasized topics and discussions, including addressing diversity, aligning expectations, assessing capacities, motivating mentees, and fostering independence. These findings suggest that mentors internalized this content and transferred it to behavior change. The behavior changes may reveal a larger change in the institutional environment around the mentoring of students. The UNZA Mentor Training Program appears to have sustained impact after a year and should bode well for future benefits to students, faculty, and the institution.

Consortium for violence prevention research, leadership training, and implementation for excellence (CONVERGE): a protocol to train science leaders in gender-based-violence and violence-against-children research for impact

Background

Gender-based violence (GBV) and violence against children (VAC) are two prevalent and highly interconnected global health challenges, yet data and research capacities to study these forms of violence and to generate evidence-based policies and programs remain limited. To address critical shortages in research capacity in Vietnam and to establish a model for other Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), we are establishing CONVERGE-the Consortium for Violence Prevention Research, Implementation, and Leadership Training for Excellence.

Methods

Based on a needs assessment with partners in Vietnam, CONVERGE will provide a comprehensive research training program supporting 15 long-term, postdoctoral trainees with multi-disciplinary research training in GBV and VAC. We also will offer in-country trainings and short-courses to 40 short-term mid-career academic trainees and 60 short-term practitioner/stakeholder trainees over 5  years to build productive GBV and VAC academic, scientific, and practitioner networks. The CONVERGE training program has four components: (1) 14 h of virtual/in-person annual mentorship training to prepare research mentors and to create a pipeline of future mentors in Vietnam; (2) a one-month intensive research training for long-term postdoctoral fellows at Emory University; (3) a structured 17-month, in-country mentored research project for long-term trainees that results in a peer-reviewed manuscript and a subsequent grant submission; and, (4) week-long in-country intensive translational trainings on implementation science, advanced topics in leadership, and advanced topics in science dissemination. Opportunities for on-going virtual training and professional networking will be provided for CONVERGE trainees and mentors in Vietnam with other trainees and mentors of D43s focused on injury/violence prevention, D43s housed at Emory, and D43s with other institutions in Southeast Asia. To assess the reach, implementation, fidelity, and effectiveness of these four components, we will implement a rigorous, mixed-methods, multi-level evaluation strategy using process and outcome measures. Findings from the evaluation will be used to refine program components for future trainee and mentor cohorts and to assess long-term program impact.

Discussion

Led by Emory University in the US and Hanoi Medical University in Vietnam, CONVERGE represents leading institutions and experts from around the world, with a goal of providing mentorship opportunities for early-career scientists with an interest in violence prevention.

Capacity building through comprehensive implementation research training and mentorship: an approach for translating knowledge into practice

BACKGROUND

Implementation research (IR) is increasingly gaining popularity as the act of carrying an intention into effect. It is thus an important approach to addressing individual practices, policies, programmes and other technologies to solving public health problems. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) continue to experience public health problems which could be addressed using implementation research. These countries however fall behind prioritizing implementation research due to the disorganized approach used to providing knowledge about the value and scope of implementation research. This paper seeks to explain steps taken to resolve this by capacity strengthening activities through a comprehensive implementation research training and mentorship programme which was informed by needs assessment.

METHODS

The roll-out of the comprehensive implementation research training and mentorship was done in phases, including engaging the implementation research community through TDR Global, competency building for programme officers and ethical review board/committee members, and practical guidance to develop an implementation research proposal. The Bloom taxonomy guided the training whilst the Kirkpatrick Model was used for the evaluation of the effectiveness of the capacity building.

RESULTS

The findings identified critical areas of mentors and how mentorship should be structured and the most effective ways of delivering mentorship. These findings were used to develop a mentorship guide in IR. The mentorship guidance is to be used as a check-tool for mentoring participants during trainings as part of the package of resources in implementation research. It is also to be used in equipping review board members with knowledge on ethical issues in implementation research.

CONCLUSION

The approach for providing comprehensive implementation research training and mentorship for programme personnel has provided an opportunity for both potential mentors and mentees to make inputs into developing a mentorship guidance for LMICs. This guidance would help address mentorship initiation and implementation challenges in IR.

A roadmap of strategies to support cardiovascular researchers: from policy to practice

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Cardiovascular research has therefore never been more crucial. Cardiovascular researchers must be provided with a research environment that enables them to perform at their highest level, maximizing their opportunities to work effectively with key stakeholders to address this global issue. At present, cardiovascular researchers face a range of challenges and barriers, including a decline in funding, job insecurity and a lack of diversity at senior leadership levels. Indeed, many cardiovascular researchers, particularly women, have considered leaving the sector, highlighting a crucial need to develop strategies to support and retain researchers working in the cardiovascular field. In this Roadmap article, we present solutions to problems relevant to cardiovascular researchers worldwide that are broadly classified across three key areas: capacity building, research funding and fostering diversity and equity. This Roadmap provides opportunities for research institutions, as well as governments and funding bodies, to implement changes from policy to practice, to address the most important factors restricting the career progression of cardiovascular researchers.

Experiential Learning and Mentorship in Global Health Leadership Programs: Capturing Lessons from Across the Globe

Objectives

The changing global landscape of disease and public health crises, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, call for a new generation of global health leaders. As global health leadership programs evolve, many have incorporated experiential learning and mentoring (ELM) components into their structure. However, there has been incomplete consideration on how ELM activities are deployed, what challenges they face and how programs adapt to meet those challenges. This paper builds on the co-authors' experiences as trainees, trainers, organizers and evaluators of six global health leadership programs to reflect on lessons learned regarding ELM. We also consider ethics, technology, gender, age and framing that influence how ELM activities are developed and implemented.

Findings

Despite the diverse origins and funding of these programs, all six are focused on training participants from low- and middle-income countries drawing on a diversity of professions. Each program uses mixed didactic approaches, practice-based placements, competency and skills-driven curricula, and mentorship via various modalities. Main metrics for success include development of trainee networks, acquisition of skills and formation of relationships; programs that included research training had specific research metrics as well. Common challenges the programs face include ensuring clarity of expectations of all participants and mentors; maintaining connection among trainees; meeting the needs of trainee cohorts with different skill sets and starting points; and ensuring trainee cohorts capture age, gender and other forms of diversity.

Conclusions

ELM activities for global health leadership are proving even more critical now as the importance of effective individual leaders in responding to crises becomes evident. Future efforts for ELM in global health leadership should emphasize local adaptation and sustainability. Practice-based learning and established mentoring relationships provide the building blocks for competent leaders to navigate complex dynamics with the flexibility and conscientiousness needed to improve the health of global populations.

Key Takeaways

Experiential learning and mentorship activities within global health leadership programs provide the hands-on practice and support that the next generation of global health leaders need to address the health challenges of our times.Six global health leadership programs with experiential learning and mentorship components are showcased to highlight differences and similarities in their approaches and capture a broad picture of achievements that can help inform future programs.Emphasis on inter-professional training, mixed-learning approaches and mentorship modalities were common across programs. Both individual capacity building and development of trainees' professional networks were seen as critical, reflecting the value of inter-personal connections for long-term leadership success.During program design, future programs should recognize the "frame" within which the program will be incorporated and intentionally address diversity-in all its forms-during recruitment as well as consider North-South ethics, leadership roles, hierarchies and transition plans.

The Call for Global Health Research Mentorship for Doctorally Prepared Nurses in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Limited research about nursing mentorship in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is holding science back. This article describes the strengths and challenges associated with global health research mentorship for doctorally prepared nurses whose scholarship focuses on LMICs. Using reflexive narrative accounts from current and former nurse mentors and nurse mentees who participated in a NIH-funded global health doctoral research program, emerging themes revealed the perspectives of mentors and mentees, producing a global health mentoring model for nursing research mentorship relevant to LMICs. Identified themes, which applied across roles and primary affiliations, included 1) collaborative mentor-mentee relationships and 2) enthusiasm for global health nursing. Our global health nursing research mentor-mentee interaction systems conceptual model focuses on nursing science mentoring in LMICs incorporating interpersonal, institutional, and cultural factors. We describe successful components of global nurse researcher mentorship and summarize directions for future research in the field. Our model can be used to create more effective mentee-centered mentoring for nurses or health professionals conducting global research. To advance science, we encourage doctorally prepared nurses to support mentee-centered research mentorship experiences that are sensitive to the unique needs of interdisciplinary global health scholarship.

Strengthening Mentoring in Low- and Middle-Income Countries to Advance Global Health Research: An Overview

Mentoring is a proven path to scientific progress, but it is not a common practice in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Existing mentoring approaches and guidelines are geared toward high-income country settings, without considering in detail the differences in resources, culture, and structure of research systems of LMICs. To address this gap, we conducted five Mentoring-the-Mentor workshops in Africa, South America, and Asia, which aimed at strengthening the capacity for evidence-based, LMIC-specific institutional mentoring programs globally. The outcomes of the workshops and two follow-up working meetings are presented in this special edition of the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Seven articles offer recommendations on how to tailor mentoring to the context and culture of LMICs, and provide guidance on how to implement mentoring programs. This introductory article provides both a prelude and executive summary to the seven articles, describing the motivation, cultural context and relevant background, and presenting key findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

Mentoring the Mentors: Implementation and Evaluation of Four Fogarty-Sponsored Mentoring Training Workshops in Low-and Middle-Income Countries

A growing body of evidence highlights the importance of competent mentoring in academic research. We describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of four regional 2-day intensive workshops to train mid- and senior-level investigators conducting public health, clinical, and basic science research across multiple academic institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on tools and techniques of effective mentoring. Sponsored by the Fogarty International Center, workshops included didactic presentations, interactive discussions, and small-group problem-based learning and were conducted in Lima, Peru; Mombasa, Kenya; Bangalore, India; and Johannesburg, South Africa, from 2013 to 2016. Mid- or senior-level faculty from multiple academic institutions within each region applied and were selected. Thirty faculty from 12 South America–based institutions, 29 faculty from eight East Africa–based institutions, 37 faculty from 14 South Asia–based institutions, and 36 faculty from 13 Africa-based institutions participated, with diverse representation across disciplines, gender, and academic rank. Discussions and evaluations revealed important comparisons and contrasts in the practice of mentoring, and specific barriers and facilitators to mentoring within each cultural and regional context. Specific regional issues related to hierarchy, the post-colonial legacy, and diversity arose as challenges to mentoring in different parts of the world. Common barriers included a lack of a culture of mentoring, time constraints, lack of formal training, and a lack of recognition for mentoring. These workshops provided valuable training, were among the first of their kind, were well-attended, rated highly, and provided concepts and a structure for the development and strengthening of formal mentoring programs across LMIC institutions.