Mentoring up for early career investigators: Empowering mentees to proactively engage in their mentoring relationships

Introduction

Effective mentorship is recognized as critical for the professional development of clinical and translational investigators. Evidence-based mentorship training prompted the development of training for mentees at early career stages who are navigating both mentor and mentee roles. The curriculum titled, Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators, recognizes the importance of building mentee self-efficacy across proactive mentorship skills and competencies.

Methods

Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators curriculum is based on the research mentor training approach in Entering Mentoring. Pilot implementations of Mentoring Up at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and University of Pennsylvania had positive training outcomes for KL2 Scholars. Subsequently, Mentoring Up was implemented and evaluated at several other institutions. For 26 implementations longer than 4 hours, data were collected on trainee demographics, satisfaction with training, skill gains across mentorship competencies, and the intent to change mentoring behaviors following training.

Results

88% of participants rated the mentee training as valuable. Significant skill gains were reported across all mentorship competencies following training. 77% reported specific plans to change or augment their mentoring behaviors because of the training. The majority aligned with mentorship skill competencies (aligning expectations, effective communications) or mentoring up strategies (voicing needs, setting boundaries, communicating proactively).

Conclusion

Mentoring Up training is effective in advancing mentee skills and promoting strategies to be more proactive in getting their mentoring needs met. Mentoring Up offers an expansion to the suite of mentorship education and resources to support the career advancement of all in the translational science workforce.

Rigorous science demands support of transgender scientists

To build a just, equitable, and diverse academy, scientists and institutions must address systemic barriers that sex and gender minorities face. This Commentary summarizes (1) critical context informing the contemporary oppression of transgender people, (2) how this shapes extant research on sex and gender, and (3) actions to build an inclusive and rigorous academy for all.

Preclinical Evaluation of Foamy Virus Vector-Mediated Gene Addition in Human Hematopoietic Stem/Progenitor Cells for Correction of Leukocyte Adhesion Deficiency Type 1

Ex vivo gene therapy procedures targeting hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) predominantly utilize lentivirus-based vectors for gene transfer. We provide the first pre-clinical evidence of the therapeutic utility of a foamy virus vector (FVV) for the genetic correction of human leukocyte adhesion deficiency type 1 (LAD-1), an inherited primary immunodeficiency resulting from mutation of the β2 integrin common chain, CD18. CD34+ HSPCs isolated from a severely affected LAD-1 patient were transduced under a current good manufacturing practice-compatible protocol with FVV harboring a therapeutic CD18 transgene. LAD-1-associated cellular chemotactic defects were ameliorated in transgene-positive, myeloid-differentiated LAD-1 cells assayed in response to a strong neutrophil chemoattractant in vitro. Xenotransplantation of vector-transduced LAD-1 HSPCs in immunodeficient (NSG) mice resulted in long-term (∼5 months) human cell engraftment within murine bone marrow. Moreover, engrafted LAD-1 myeloid cells displayed in vivo levels of transgene marking previously reported to ameliorate the LAD-1 phenotype in a large animal model of the disease. Vector insertion site analysis revealed a favorable vector integration profile with no overt evidence of genotoxicity. These results coupled with the unique biological features of wild-type foamy virus support the development of FVVs for ex vivo gene therapy of LAD-1.

Evaluation of a Culturally Responsive Mentorship Education Program for the Advisers of Howard Hughes Medical Institute Gilliam Program Graduate Students

Effective mentorship is critical to the success of trainees in research career pathways, significantly impacting their research productivity, academic and research self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. Research faculty may be unaware of or unprepared to address mentor-mentee dynamics in mentoring relationships, especially those that go beyond traditional scientific skill development. Addressing mentorship dynamics can be even more challenging for mentors from well-represented backgrounds working with mentees from historically excluded racial/ethnic groups. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute supports programmatic interventions, like the Mentorship Skills Development (MSD) course, an innovative program that aims to advance the mentorship competencies and cultural diversity awareness of mentors. Between 2015 and 2020, more than 200 faculty mentors participated in the MSD. Quantitative and qualitative data reveal significant gains in mentorship skills and cultural awareness, with mentors reporting increases in their confidence to have conversations around race and culture with their mentees. More than 85% reported actual or intended changes to their cultural responsiveness or mentorship behaviors. Importantly, behavioral changes were also observed by their mentees. These data indicate that culturally responsive mentorship education can increase knowledge and efficacy in effective mentorship practices and improve mentorship experiences of both mentors and mentees.

Clinical and translational science award T32/TL1 training programs: program goals and mentorship practices

INTRODUCTION

A national survey characterized training and career development for translational researchers through Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) T32/TL1 programs. This report summarizes program goals, trainee characteristics, and mentorship practices.

METHODS

A web link to a voluntary survey was emailed to 51 active TL1 program directors and administrators. Descriptive analyses were performed on aggregate data. Qualitative data analysis used open coding of text followed by an axial coding strategy based on the grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

Fifty out of 51 (98%) invited CTSA hubs responded. Training program goals were aligned with the CTSA mission. The trainee population consisted of predoctoral students (50%), postdoctoral fellows (30%), and health professional students in short-term (11%) or year-out (9%) research training. Forty percent of TL1 programs support both predoctoral and postdoctoral trainees. Trainees are diverse by academic affiliation, mostly from medicine, engineering, public health, non-health sciences, pharmacy, and nursing. Mentor training is offered by most programs, but mandatory at less than one-third of them. Most mentoring teams consist of two or more mentors.

CONCLUSIONS

CTSA TL1 programs are distinct from other NIH-funded training programs in their focus on clinical and translational research, cross-disciplinary approaches, emphasis on team science, and integration of multiple trainee types. Trainees in nearly all TL1 programs were engaged in all phases of translational research (preclinical, clinical, implementation, public health), suggesting that the CTSA TL1 program is meeting the mandate of NCATS to provide training to develop the clinical and translational research workforce.

Value, Support, and Advancement: An Organization's Role in Faculty Career Intentions in Academic Medicine

Purpose

Faculty engagement in academic medical centers is essential to advancing efficient healthcare delivery, research productivity, and organizational quality. The authors used turnover theory to empirically examine factors that influence faculty engagement, including both aspirational and attrition-related career intentions.

Methods

Using a convergent, mixed methods design, the authors surveyed 284 faculty at a large Midwestern public university's school of medicine in Fall 2015, Fall 2016, and Spring 2017. The study's questionnaire included a series of scales which informed three outcome variables (promotion aspirations, leadership aspirations, and intent to leave the organization) and four groups (role strain, work-family conflict, organizational commitment and support, and departmental commitment and support) of predictor variables, all of which have been previously validated with medical faculty populations. The scales were followed by open-ended questions which allowed respondents to further elaborate on their experiences in their organization related to each outcome variable. The authors used a hierarchical multiple regression model to assess the effect of each of the four groups of predictor variables on the outcome variables and then employed an iterative thematic analysis of open-ended responses to further elucidate faculty's reported experiences.

Results

Organizational commitment and support were significantly associated with faculty's promotion aspirations, leadership aspirations, and intentions to leave the organization. Thematic analysis of participant responses to open-ended questions further revealed the specific career development support faculty desired, mainly, streamlined and transparent promotion and leadership processes; clear guidance to maneuver these processes; holistic professional development opportunities; feeling valued; and supports for clinical and administrative tasks.

Conclusion

Advancing organizational policy that supports infrastructure for evidence-based interventions and programming for the intentional career development of faculty is an important aspect of a proactive talent development and retention model in academic medical centers.

Actionable recommendations from trainees to improve science training

Over the past 20 years, a series of reports written by groups of senior researchers and administrators have recommended changes to improve the training environments for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers in the United States. However, academic institutions and departments have largely failed to implement these recommendations, which has exacerbated the problems faced by these trainees. Here, based on input from trainees at different career stages, we outline seven practical changes that academic institutions and departments can make to improve their training environments.