Characterization of Mentorship Programs in Departments of Surgery in the United States

Kibbe, Melina R.; Pellegrini, Carlos A.; Townsend, Courtney M.; Helenowski, Irene; Patti, Marco G.

doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.1670

Cited by 97 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All respondents reported either formal (43.6%) or informal (56.4%) faculty mentoring programs. This differs from a recent survey of mentoring practices in departments of surgery in which only 54% of chairs reported having established mentoring programs ( n = 41/76), most of which were informal and unstructured …”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 93%

“…This implies that although mentoring is an expectation, many basic structures to support and cultivate mentorship may not be in place. These findings are similar to those of other studies on faculty mentoring, including those from EM, that have identified similar gaps in mentoring training, establishing expectations, and the evaluation process . This opens up opportunities for EM to learn from more robust programs.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Our study characterized the variability of faculty mentoring practices in EM departments, which can be categorized into practices that either facilitate or augment the traditional dyad mentoring model. This variability is not uncommon in other departments or institutions and is arguably a necessity to expand the network of mentors available to a faculty member and provide the multidimensional guidance required to be engaged and successful …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Welch

Sawtelle²,

Cheng

et al. 2017

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Welch

Sawtelle²,

Cheng

et al. 2017

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Low-quality mentorship is not only observed in CM&ID training but also broadly recognised among other medical specialties as well as in academic medicine [5–7, 12, 13, 15–17]. Barriers to mentoring and inadequate mentoring can be related to many factors including personal, relational, and structural barriers [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current mentorship practices in the training of the next generation of clinical microbiology and infectious disease specialists: an international cross-sectional survey

Ong

Zapf

Çevik

et al. 2019

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to describe the current practice of mentorship in clinical microbiology (CM) and infectious diseases (ID) training, to identify possible areas for improvement and to assess the factors that are associated with satisfactory mentorship. An international cross-sectional survey containing 35 questions was answered by 317 trainees or specialists who recently completed clinical training. Overall, 179/317 (56%) trainees were satisfied with their mentors, ranging from 7/9 (78%) in non-European countries, 39/53 (74%) in Northern Europe, 13/22 (59%) in Eastern Europe, 61/110 (56%) in Western Europe, 37/76 (49%) in South-Western Europe to 22/47 (47%) in South-Eastern Europe. However, only 115/317 (36%) respondents stated that they were assigned an official mentor during their training. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the satisfaction of trainees was significantly associated with having a mentor who was a career model (OR 6.4, 95%CI 3.5–11.7), gave constructive feedback on work performance (OR 3.3, 95%CI 1.8–6.2), and knew the family structure of the mentee (OR 5.5, 95%CI 3.0–10.1). If trainees felt overburdened, 70/317 (22%) felt that they could not talk to their mentors. Moreover, 67/317 (21%) stated that they could not talk to their mentor when unfairly treated and 59/317 (19%) felt uncertain. Training boards and authorities responsible for developing and monitoring CM&ID training programmes should invest in the development of high-quality mentorship programmes for trainees in order to contribute to the careers of the next generation of professionals.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s10096-019-03509-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Participation in these formal mentoring programs has been shown to improve academic and research productivity and work satisfaction among junior clinical and translational research faculty [1]. While mentorship programs exist throughout departments of surgery and surgical societies across the country, many are unstructured with no clear evidence of routine evaluation or formal analysis of outcomes [2]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paying it forward

Zakrison

Polk

Dixon

et al. 2017

Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Mentorship programs in surgery are utilized to overcome barriers to clinical and academic productivity, research success, and work-life balance. We sought to determine if the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) Mentoring Program has met its goals of fostering academic and personal growth in young acute care surgeons. Methods We conducted a systematic program evaluation of EAST Mentoring Program’s first four years. Demographic information was collected from EAST records, mentorship program applications, and mentee-mentor career development plans. We reviewed the career development plans for thematic commonalities and results of a structured, online questionnaire distributed since program inception. A mixed methods approach was used to better understand the program goals from both mentee and mentor perspectives, as well as attitudes and barriers regarding the perceived success of this career development program. Results During 2012–2015, 65 mentoring dyads were paired and 60 completed the program. Of 184 surveys distributed, 108 were returned (57% response rate). Respondents were evenly distributed between mentees and mentors (53 vs. 55, p=0.768). In participant surveys, mentoring relationships were viewed to focus on research (45%), “sticky situations” [e.g., communication, work-life balance] (27%), education (18%), or administrative issues (10%). Mentees were more focused on research and education vs. mentors (74% vs. 50%, p=0.040). Mentees felt that goals were “always” or “usually” met vs. mentors (89% vs. 77% p= 0.096). Two barriers to successful mentorship included time and communication, with most pairs communicating by email. Most respondents (91%) planned to continue the relationship beyond the EAST Mentoring Program and recommended the experience to colleagues. Conclusions Mentee satisfaction with the EAST Mentoring Program was high. Mentoring is a beneficial tool to promote success amongst EAST’s young members, but differences exist between mentee and mentor perceptions. Revising communication expectations and time commitment to improve career development may help our young acute care surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V STUDY TYPE Epidemiological

show abstract

Characterization of Mentorship Programs in Departments of Surgery in the United States

Cited by 97 publications

References 23 publications

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Current mentorship practices in the training of the next generation of clinical microbiology and infectious disease specialists: an international cross-sectional survey

Paying it forward

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About