Purpose -Despite increasing numbers of women attaining higher levels in academic degrees, gender disparities remain in higher education and among university faculty. Authors have posited that this may stem from inadequate academic identity development of women at the doctoral level. While gender differences may be explained by multiple and variable factors, mentoring has been proposed as a viable means to promote academic identity development and address these gender gaps. A "StartingDoc program" was launched and supported by four universities in French-speaking Switzerland. The purpose of this paper is to report the experience of one of the six "many-to-one" mentoring groups involved in the StartingDoc program in 2012-2013. Design/methodology/approach -This study is based on the description of a group experience within a university-based mentoring scheme offered to women entering in their PhD program in French-speaking Switzerland. It is examined using a qualitative, narrative case study design. Findings -Themes from the narrative analysis included the four dimensions of the Clutterbuck model of mentoring (guiding, coaching, counselling, networking), as well as an additional five emerging

Background: D/deaf and hard of hearing populations are at higher risk for experiencing physical and mental health problems compared to hearing populations. In addition, they commonly encounter barriers to accessing and benefiting from health services, which largely stem from challenges they face in communicating with healthcare providers. Healthcare providers commonly lack tailored communication skills in caring for D/deaf and hard of hearing populations, which lead to difficulties and dissatisfaction for both staff and D/deaf and hard of hearing communities. This research project aims to develop and evaluate a capacity-building intervention for healthcare providers with the goal of increasing their awareness of D/deaf and hard of hearing individuals' experiences with the healthcare system, their distinct needs, and improving their capacity to communicate effectively with this patient population.Methods: This research project features a participative action research design using qualitative and quantitative methods. Consistent with participative action research, the study will actively involve the target populations, key stakeholders and representative associations. The intervention will be developed and tested through iterative phases. The Integrated Model of Training Evaluation and Effectiveness will guide prospective evaluation of the intervention. The latter will involve qualitative and quantitative assessments in participants before and after the intervention and at 6-months follow-up.Discussion: Results will contribute to research aimed at decreasing barriers to accessing and benefiting from healthcare services for D/deaf and hard of hearing individuals. Findings will be presented to representative associations and political authorities, as well as disseminated at research conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.

No abstract

No abstract

Background D/deaf and hard of hearing (D&HoH) populations are disproportionally affected by physical and mental health problems while facing barriers to accessing health services. These barriers stem from communication challenges with healthcare providers, who are often unprepared to meet their specific needs. This study aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention to improve healthcare providers’ skills to communicate with these patients. Methods This study featured a participative action research design. Consistently, the intervention was developed through iterative phases together with the target populations and key stakeholders. The finale version was tested in healthcare workers in Canton of Vaud in Switzerland. Participants completed a questionnaire before (T0) and 6 months after (T1) the intervention, assessing perceived knowledge of deafness and hard of hearing and tools to improve communication, self-efficacy on how to communicate with D&HoH patients and institutional benefits (application frequency of communication rules and tools). Results The final intervention aimed to increase participants’ 1) awareness of D&HoH experience and communication needs, 2) knowledge of the tools and basic rules to improve communication. Two D&HoH trainers led one half-day intervention among 28 healthcare providers (e.g., nurses, pharmacists; mean age=43.6). Paired-sample t-tests revealed significant increases in knowledge between T0 and T1, t (23) = -7.81, p < .001 and in self-efficacy, t (24) = -10.23, p < .001, whereas there was no significant difference between institutional benefits at T0 and T1. Conclusions Although findings suggest the intervention is a promising means to increase perceived knowledge and self-efficacy on how communicating with D&HoH patients, complementary approaches, such as a resource person within the institutions providing day-to-day support to the teams besides the intervention, may be necessary to induce institutional changes. Key messages • Future research should implement the intervention more broadly within inpatient and outpatient settings in Switzerland to increase knowledge on how communicating with D&HoH patients. • Intervention implementation should be complemented by an additional structural approach to induce sustainable changes in practice and evaluated over 12 months to ensure sustainability.