"Having the right chemistry": a qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine.

PURPOSE: To develop a deeper understanding of mentoring by exploring lived experiences of academic medicine faculty members. Mentoring relationships are key to developing productive careers in academic medicine, but such alliances hold a certain "mystery." METHOD: Using qualitative techniques, between November 1999 and March 2000, the authors conducted individual telephone interviews of 16 faculty members about their experiences with mentoring. Interviews were taped and transcribed and authors identified major themes through multiple readings. A consensus taxonomy for classifying content evolved from comparisons of coding by four reviewers. Themes expressed by participants were studied for patterns of connection and grouped into broader categories. RESULTS: Almost 98% of participants identified lack of mentoring as the first (42%) or second (56%) most important factor hindering career progress in academic medicine. Finding a suitable mentor requires effort and persistence. Effective mentoring necessitates a certain chemistry for an appropriate interpersonal match. Prized mentors have "clout," knowledge, and interest in the mentees, and provide both professional and personal support. In cross-gender mentoring, maintaining clear boundaries is essential for an effective relationship. Same-gender or same-race matches between mentor and mentee were not felt to be essential. CONCLUSIONS: Having a mentor is critical to having a successful career in academic medicine. Mentees need to be diligent in seeking out these relationships and institutions need to encourage and value the work of mentors. Participants without formalized mentoring relationships should look to peers and colleagues for assistance in navigating the academic system.     

Innovative mentoring programs to promote gender equity in academic medicine.

The authors describe the history, characteristics, and goals of four innovative programs, each in a medical school, that were established in 1998 to help faculty members of both sexes obtain mentors and thereby facilitate their career advancement. The programs were established as the result of an initiative by the Office on Women's Health (OWH) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Specifically, the OWH convened the National Task Force on Mentoring for Health Professionals, which determined that two principles are paramount to the success of any mentoring relationship or program: institutional commitment and institutional rewards and recognition to mentors. In accordance with the task force findings, the OWH created the National Centers of Leadership in Academic Medicine, one at each of four medical schools: MCP Hahnemann School of Medicine; the University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine; East Carolina University School of Medicine; and Meharry Medical College School of Medicine. The authors give highlights of each program's goals and progress, and note that, ideally, these programs will eventually serve as models for similar programs at other schools. Programs such as these foster the advancement of a diverse faculty, a more supportive academic environment, and the education of providers who are sensitive to the needs of all their patients, staff, and colleagues.     

Women in academic general surgery.

PURPOSE: To portray the professional experiences of men and women in academic general surgery with specific attention to factors associated with differing academic productivity and with leaving academia. METHOD: A 131-question survey was mailed to all female (1,076) and a random 2:1 sample of male (2,152) members of the American College of Surgeons in three mailings between September 1998 and March 1999. Detailed questions regarding academic rank, career aspirations, publication rate, grant funding, workload, harassment, income, marriage and parenthood were asked. A five-point Likert scale measured influences on career satisfaction. Responses from strictly academic and tenure-track surgeons were analyzed and interpreted by gender, age, and rank. RESULTS: Overall, 317 surgeons in academic practice (168 men, 149 women) responded, of which 150 were in tenure-track positions (86 men, 64 women). Men and women differed in academic rank, tenure status, career aspirations, and income. Women surgeons had published a median of ten articles compared with 25 articles for men (p <.001). Marriage or parenthood did not influence numbers of publications for women. Overall career satisfaction was high, but women reported feeling career advancement opportunities were not equally available to them as to their male colleagues and feeling isolation from surgical peers. Ten percent to 20% of surgeons considered leaving academia, with women assistant professors (29%) contemplating this most commonly. CONCLUSION: Addressing the differences between men and women academic general surgeons is critical in fostering career development and in recruiting competitive candidates of both sexes to general surgery.     

Mentoring program for minority faculty at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

Research indicates that having a faculty mentor and being part of an active network of peers are critical ingredients of successful academic medicine careers. Minority physicians, however, often do not have mentors, and the problem is greatest for minority groups underrepresented in medicine. The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in 1994-1996 undertook to learn the extent of mentoring programs in its departments and divisions and to compare the experiences of underrepresented-minority faculty and others. The results were used to establish a system for mentoring and networking support for minority faculty members. Examining the reports of division and department heads on their formal mentoring programs, it was clear that these leaders considered a mentor essential for career development, but many reported having no systematic plan for mentors for junior faculty. In looking at the reported experiences of minority and non-minority assistant professors (matched for promotion track, department, appointment date, and, where possible, gender), it was found that approximately half of either group did not have mentors. As a result of this information, the school established a faculty development program to meet the faculty members' demonstrated needs: annual career development meetings with new minority faculty; assistance in identifying and assigning mentors; assistance in developing research skills; and monitoring of the retention of minority faculty. As experience with the program produces additional insights into the needs of minority faculty--and particularly of junior faculty--the program will be adjusted and expanded to meet these identified needs.     

Empowering junior faculty: Penn State's faculty development and mentoring program.

Empowerment of faculty is essential for academic success. The Junior Faculty Development Program (JFDP), sponsored by the Office of Professional Development of the Penn State College of Medicine, was established in 2003 with the goal of promoting the development and advancement of junior faculty so they can achieve success in their academic careers. The program consists of two components: a curriculum in research, education, clinical practice, and career development, and an individual project completed under the guidance of a senior faculty mentor. The curriculum provides faculty with knowledge, skills, and resources. Mentoring provides relationships and support. Together, these elements combine to empower junior faculty to better manage their careers.The effectiveness of the program has been demonstrated by several measures: participants evaluated the program highly, demonstrated increases in their perceptions of their own abilities, and completed tasks important to the advancement of their careers. Participants stated they were better prepared to advance their academic careers and that the individual projects would contribute to their career advancement.On the basis of this experience, the authors suggest that faculty development programs should empower faculty so that they can more effectively chart a successful career in academic medicine. This report describes an empowerment model, and the design, implementation, and evaluation of the Junior Faculty Development Program in 2003-04 and 2004-05. The authors offer this program as a model for the benefit of other institutions and for one of their most valuable assets: junior faculty.     

Informal mentoring between faculty and medical students.

Mentoring skills are valuable assets for academic medicine faculty, who help shape the professionalism of the next generation of physicians. Mentors are role models who also act as guides for students' personal and professional development over time. Mentors can be instrumental in conveying explicit academic knowledge required to master curriculum content. Importantly, they can enhance implicit knowledge about the "hidden curriculum" of professionalism, ethics, values and the art of medicine not learned from texts. In many cases, mentors also provide emotional support and encouragement. The relationship benefits mentors as well, through greater productivity, career satisfaction, and personal gratification. Maximizing the satisfaction and productivity of such relationships entails self-awareness, focus, mutual respect, and explicit communication about the relationship. In this article, the authors describe the development of optimal mentoring relationships, emphasizing the importance of experience and flexibility in working with beginning to advanced students of different learning styles, genders, and races. Concrete advice for mentor "do's and don'ts"is offered, with case examples illustrating key concepts.     

Gender and medical careers

The concerns about physicians’ career advancement tend to be raised in gender terms, because women presently constitute close to and will soon form a majority of the medical students in most western societies. The question is to what extent female and male medical students and residents today make similar or different career and lifestyle choices? Two major mechanisms have been referred to as the reason for gender differences in career paths for physicians. The major theoretical framework tends to be the socialization or sex-role theory and later versions of this explanatory framework. The other mechanism referred to is structural and points to the barriers or the concrete support that women and men experience in making their career decisions. Studies of medical students in the UK and US have shown that women students expected family demands to hamper career plans, while male students were less influenced by family concerns. The importance of role models and mentors in setting the career goals of medical students and residents has recently confirmed early studies of the topic. A number of studies have documented that early negative experiences or lack of encouragement in medical school deter women from choosing surgery as a career. Recent studies suggest that lifestyle choices rather than merely career advancement influence both female and male surgeons’ career plans.     

Physician leadership: enhancing the career development of academic physician administrators and leaders.

As the health care environment grows more complex, there is greater opportunity for physician administrative and management leadership. Although physicians in general, and academic physicians in particular, view management as outside their purview, the increased importance of physician administrative leadership represents an opportunity for academic physicians interested in working at the interface of clinical medicine, health care, finance, and management. These physicians are called academic physician administrators and leaders (APALs). APALs are clinician-administrators whose academic contributions include both scholarly work related to their administrative duties and administrative leadership of academically important programs. However, existing academic career development infrastructure, such as academic promotions, is oriented toward traditional clinician-educator and clinician-researcher faculty. The APAL career path differs from traditional academic pathways because APALs require unique skills, different mentors, and a more expansive definition of academic productivity. This article describes how academic medical institutions could enhance the career development of academic physicians in administrative and leadership positions.     

The Junior Faculty Laboratory: an innovative model of peer mentoring

Mentoring in academic medicine has been shown to contribute to the success of junior faculty, resulting in increased productivity, career satisfaction, and opportunities for networking. Although traditional dyadic mentoring, involving one senior faculty member and one junior protégé, is the dominant model for mentoring in the academic environment, there is increasing recognition that the sharing of knowledge, skills, and experiences among peers may also contribute to the career development of junior faculty. The authors describe the structure, activities, and outcomes of the Junior Faculty Laboratory (JFL), a self-organized, flexible, and dynamic peer-mentoring model within the Duke University Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development. As an innovative mentoring model, JFL is entirely peer driven, and its activities are determined by the real-time needs of members. In contrast to some other peer-mentoring models, JFL lacks senior faculty input or a structured curriculum, members are multidisciplinary, meeting times are project driven rather than preset, and participation in collaborative projects is optional based on the interests and needs of group members. Additionally, JFL was not formed as a substitute for, but as a complement to, the dyadic mentoring relationships enjoyed by its members. The model, now in its fifth year, has demonstrated success and sustainability. The authors present the JFL as an innovative, mentoring model that can be reproduced by other junior faculty seeking to foster collegial relationships with peers while simultaneously enhancing their career development.     

Achieving professional success in US government,academia, and industry: An EMGS commentary

One of the goals of the EMGS is to help members achieve professional success in the fields they have trained in. Today, there is greater competition for jobs in genetic toxicology, genomics, and basic research than ever before. In addition, job security and the ability to advance in one's career is challenging, regardless of whether one works in a regulatory, academic, or industry environment. At the EMGS Annual Meeting in Monterey, CA (September, 2013), the Women in EMGS Special Interest Group held a workshop to discuss strategies for achieving professional success. Presentations were given by three speakers, each representing a different employment environment: Government (Miriam C. Poirier), Academia (Jeffrey L. Schwartz), and Industry (Marilyn J. Aardema). Although some differences in factors or traits affecting success in the three employment sectors were noted by each of the speakers, common factors considered important for advancement included networking, seeking out mentors, and developing exceptional communication skills. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 55:525–529, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Natural mentoring under the microscope: an investigation of mentoring relationships and latino adolescents' academic performance

The current study examined the role of natural mentoring relationships in the academic performance of urban, diverse, Latino high school students. Participants reported up to three mentors in their lives, and they were asked about their mentors' demographic characteristics and the characteristics of their mentoring relationships. The presence of a mentor was associated with fewer absences, higher educational expectations, and greater expectancies for success and sense of school belonging. Further, the number of reported mentors predicted fewer absences, higher educational expectations and a greater sense of school belonging. Mentors' educational level, frequency of contact, relationship duration, and total form of support provided by mentors were related to participants' academic outcomes. Mentor type also made a difference in youth's academic outcomes. Implications for future mentoring research and programs are discussed. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The POD: a new model for mentoring underrepresented minority faculty.

Mentoring, long recognized as a catalyst for successful careers, is particularly important to the career development of underrepresented minority (URM) faculty. In academic medicine, mentor-protégé relationships are seriously threatened by increased clinical, research, and administrative demands and an emphasis on scholarship over citizenship. New mentoring models are needed, and they should be adaptable to a medical school's unique structure and mission. The Peer-Onsite-Distance (POD) model, developed in 2002 by the authors and introduced at the College of Medicine at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, is a targeted, multilevel mentoring prototype that is built on a solid research foundation and tailored to the unique needs of URM medical school faculty. The mentee's individual needs for guidance related to career goals, resources, and the content and interaction skills that are known to be critical to successful academic careers are targeted for development. The multilevel approach provides a unique network of peer and faculty mentors who provide site-specific career guidance. Also in the network are leaders in their fields who can provide access to accurate information, cautions, predictions, and announcements of future resources or potential restrictions in academic medicine. Mentor commitments are clearly defined and time contributions are maximized. The POD model aims to promote retention and advance the careers of URM faculty by wrapping them in a protective cushion of interpersonal and intrapersonal support. The flexibility of the design allows for adaptation to any institution's unique structure and mission.     

Mentorship through advisory colleges.

OBJECTIVE: Medical students face pressures ranging from the need to create a social network to learning vast amounts of scientific material. Students often feel isolated in this system and lack mentorship. In order to counteract feelings of bureaucratic anonymity and isolation, the University of California San Francisco has created an advisory college to foster the professional and personal growth and well being of students. DESCRIPTION: UCSF has developed a formal structure to advise medical students. A selection committee, chaired by the associate dean of student affairs, appointed five faculty mentors to head advisory colleges. These five colleges serve as the advising and well-being infrastructure for the students. Mentors were chosen from a balanced range of clinical disciplines, both primary and specialty. The disciplines are obstetrics-gynecology, otolaryngology/head and neck surgery, medicine, pediatrics, and psychiatry. The mentors have demonstrated excellence in advising and counseling of students. Mentors meet individually at the beginning of the academic year with incoming first-year and second-year students. They then have bimonthly meetings with eight to ten students within each college throughout the academic year. Curricula for these group sessions include well-being discussions and coping techniques, sessions on the hidden and informal curriculum of professionalism, and discussions on career choices and strategies. For third-year students, advisory college meetings are scheduled during intersessions, which are weeklong courses that occur between the eight-week clerkship blocks. Mentors are available throughout the year to meet with students on an as-needed basis, and advisory colleges may hold group social activities. The dean's office supports each mentor with 20% salary and provides administrative support for the group college activities. DISCUSSION: Historically, UCSF students feel they receive an excellent education and appropriate job opportunities, but they do not feel they receive adequate advising and mentoring. This may have as its root cause the financial, clinical, and research pressures placed upon a faculty who are also responsible for mentoring residents and fellows. The advisory colleges begin by providing an infrastructure for developing a relationship for the student with a single faculty member. The advisory college system is incorporated into the academic schedule rather than relying on ad-hoc activities from well-meaning but inconsistently available faculty. In the early part of medical school, the advisory college relationship concentrates on assimilation into the new environment and provides the student with advice pertaining to mastering academic material. The college also serves as a sounding board for problems that can then be relayed to course directors to improve the educational experience. For students encountering academic difficulty, the college advisor can provide discreet advice about tutoring resources and can direct the student to a separately staffed Student Well-being Program. As time progresses, the mentors can direct students to key people in different fields of interest such as program directors and keep the students on track to make career decisions in a timely manner. The college system can help transform an anonymous medical school experience into a supportive, rich environment.     

导师培训项目提升临床和转化医学导师的自信心和技能

目的北京协和医院于2018年首次引入导师培训项目(MTP),以加强人才培养体系建设。本研究旨在对MTP培训的效果进行调查研究。方法研究纳入18位接受MTP培训的临床和转化医学导师,培训前、培训后1周、3个月对导师技能的自信程度进行问卷调查。采用非参数Kruskal-Wailis H检验评估培训前后的差异,使用开放编码分析开放性问题。结果经MTP培训后,全部导师认为培训提高导师技能、有助于成为优秀的导师,促进导师间的联络与合作,提高职业满意度。导师对具体技能的信心如沟通、制定长期职业规划、与学生制定统一的目标、时间管理、以身作则、获得课题基金、撰写发表研究结果等方面均有显著提高。导师的实践改变体现在将导师理念、沟通模式和技巧、利用MTP培训学习到的个人发展工具等应用到导师的实践过程。结论MTP培训有助于导师理念革新和技能提升,可考虑进一步开展并推广,培养具有胜任力的临床和转化医学导师。     

The transition from learner to provider/teacher: The learning needs of new orthopaedic consultants

Background  

Given the relatively sudden change from learner to teacher-provider that new consultants experience and the likely clinical and managerial challenges this may pose, there is a relative dearth of research into the problems they may have in relation to their new roles, or how supported they feel by senior colleagues acting in a mentoring role. This research sought to determine new consultants views on the quality and relevance of their training, its relationship to their confidence in clinical and managerial skills and their views on mentorship by senior colleagues.     

Evaluation of an Enhanced Peer Mentoring Program on Scholarly Productivity and Promotion in Academic Emergency Medicine: A Five-Year Review

ObjectiveTo design, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of an enhanced peer mentoring program (EPMP) for faculty in emergency medicine aimed at overcoming traditional mentoring challenges.MethodsFull time faculty (Clinical Instructor, Assistant, and Associate levels) were placed into peer groups (based upon their primary academic roles) led by senior faculty advisors at the Professor level. Peer groups met at least quarterly from 2012 to 2017. In lieu of a structured curriculum, session topics were informed by individual faculty surveys and peer group consensus. Areas of focus included work-life balance, prioritizing academic commitments, identification of mentors (both within and external to the department and university), networking opportunities, promotions goals, and career satisfaction.ResultsEffectiveness of the EPMP was evaluated by academic productivity and advancement over a 5- year period. A total of 22 faculty members participated in the program. There was an increase in promotions to the next academic level, from 3 promotions in the five years before the program to 7 promotions in the five years of the program. Total grant funding increased 3-fold from $500,000 to $1,706,479 from the first year to the last year of the evaluation period.ConclusionsThis enhanced peer mentoring program was effective in mitigating many of the traditional mentoring challenges faced by faculty in academia and was successful in improving both academic productivity and advancement.     

One year outcomes of a mentoring scheme for female academics: a pilot study at the Institute of Psychiatry,King's College London

Background

The professional development of under-represented faculty may be enhanced by mentorship, but we understand very little about the mechanisms by which mentoring brings about change. Our study posed the research question, what are the mechanisms by which mentoring may support professional development in under-represented groups?The study aims to: (i) to pilot a mentoring scheme for female academics; (ii) to compare various health-related and attitudinal measures in mentees at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year into the mentoring relationship and, (iii) to compare pre-mentoring expectations to outcomes at 6 months and 1 year follow-up for mentees and mentors.

Methods

Female academic mentees were matched 1:1 or 2:1 with more senior academic mentors. Online surveys were conducted to compare health-related and attitudinal measures and expectations of mentoring at baseline with outcomes at 6 months and 1 year using paired t-tests and McNemar's test for matched cohort data.

Results

N = 46 mentoring pairs, 44 (96%) mentees completed the pre-mentoring survey, 37 (80%) at 6 months and 30 (65%) at 1 year. Job-related well-being (anxiety-contentment), self-esteem and self-efficacy all improved significantly and work-family conflict diminished at 1 year. Highest expectations were career progression (39; 89%), increased confidence (38; 87%), development of networking skills (33; 75%), better time-management (29; 66%) and better work-life balance (28; 64%). For mentees, expectations at baseline were higher than perceived achievements at 6 months or 1 year follow-up.For mentors (N = 39), 36 (92%) completed the pre-mentoring survey, 32 (82%) at 6 months and 28 (72%) at 1 year. Mentors' highest expectations were of satisfaction in seeing people progress (26; 69%), seeing junior staff develop and grow (19; 53%), helping solve problems (18; 50%), helping women advance their careers (18; 50%) and helping remove career obstacles (13; 36%). Overall, gains at 6 months and 1 year exceeded pre-mentoring expectations.

Conclusions

This uncontrolled pilot study suggests that mentoring can improve aspects of job-related well-being, self-esteem and self-efficacy over 6 months, with further improvements seen after 1 year for female academics. Work-family conflict can also diminish. Despite these gains, mentees' prior expectations were shown to be unrealistically high, but mentors' expectations were exceeded.

     

The Impact of Imaging Informatics Fellowships

Imaging informatics (II) is an area within clinical informatics that is particularly important in the field of radiology. Provider groups have begun employing dedicated radiologist-informaticists to bridge medical, information technology and administrative functions, and academic institutions are meeting this demand through formal II fellowships. However, little is known about how these programs influence graduates’ careers and perceptions about professional development. We electronically surveyed 26 graduates from US II fellowships and consensus leaders in the II community—many of whom were subspecialty diagnostic radiologists (68%) employed within academic institutions (48%)—about the perceived impact of II fellowships on career development and advancement. All graduates felt that II fellowship made them more valuable to employers, with the majority of reporting ongoing II roles (78%) and continued used of competencies (61%) and skills (56%) gained during fellowship in their current jobs. Other key benefits included access to mentors, protected time for academic work, networking opportunities, and positive impacts of annual compensation. Of respondents without II fellowship training, all would recommend fellowships to current trainees given the ability to gain a “still rare” but “essential skill set” that is “critical for future leaders in radiology” and “better job opportunities.” While some respondents felt that II fellowships needed further formalization and standardization, most (85%) disagreed with requiring a 2-year II fellowship in order to qualify for board certification in clinical informatics. Instead, most believed that fellowships should be integrated with clinical residency or fellowship training while preserving formal didactics and unstructured project time. More work is needed to understand existing variations in II fellowship training structure and identify the optimal format for programs targeted at radiologists.     

Multisource feedback as part of the Medical Board of Australia’s Professional Performance Framework: outcomes from a preliminary study

Background

The recent introduction of the Professional Performance Framework by the Medical Board of Australia is intended to strengthen continuing professional development for the 100,000 or so medical practitioners in Australia. An important option within the Framework is the use of multisource feedback from patients, colleagues and self-evaluations to allow doctors to reflect on their performance and identify methods for self-improvement. The aim of this study is to explore the relationships between patient feedback, colleague feedback, and self-evaluation using the same questionnaires as used by patients and colleagues.

Methods

Feedback data for around 2000 doctors belonging to four different groups were collected through non-probability sampling from nearly 100,000 patients and 24,000 colleagues. Reliability analysis was performed using single measures intraclass coefficients, Cronbach’ alpha and signal-to-noise ratios. Analysis of variance was used to identify significant differences in scores between items and sub-populations of doctors; principal component analysis involving Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test for sphericity was used to reveal components of doctor performance; and correlation analysis was used for identifying convergence between sets of scores from different sources.

Results

Patients rated doctors highest on respect shown and lowest on reassurance provided. Colleagues rated doctors highest on trustworthiness and lowest on ability to say ‘no’. With regard to self-evaluation, doctors gave themselves lower scores on the patient questionnaire and the colleague questionnaire (10 and 12%, respectively) than they received from their patients and colleagues. There were weak but positive correlations between self-scores and scores received indicating some convergence of agreement, with doctors feeling more comfortable with self-evaluation from the perspective of patients than from colleagues.

Conclusions

Supplementing patient and colleague feedback with self-evaluation may help doctors confirm for themselves areas for enhanced CPD through convergence. If self-evaluation is used, the colleague questionnaire may be sufficient, since aspects of clinical competence, management, communication and leadership as well as patient care can be addressed through colleague items. Mentoring of doctors in CPD should aim to make doctors feel more comfortable about being rated by colleagues to enhance convergence between self-scores and evaluations from the perspective of colleagues.