Future HIV Mentoring Programs to Enhance Diversity

Stoff, David M.; Cargill, Victoria A.

doi:10.1007/s10461-016-1502-y

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zea and Bowleg [51] employ an ecological framework to identify the impact of the multilevel structural barriers that impede new investigators from crossing the final frontier from mentored research to independence. Stoff and Cargill [52] close the supplement with a proposal for a general template to guide future mentoring program development.…”

Section: This Supplementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building a More Diverse Workforce in HIV/AIDS Research: The Time has Come

Stoff

Cargill

2016

AIDS Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigators from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds are grossly underrepresented in the nation's biomedical research enterprise. Projections of current demographic trends suggest that population growth rates of minority populations will outpace that of the Caucasian population by 2060. Thus, this workforce will remain a poor reflection of the U.S. population. As a result of this underrepresentation of all sectors of the U.S. populace, the majority of the HIV research involving minority populations-those disproportionately impacted by HIV infection-will be conducted by investigators who do not resemble them. Although this does not necessarily preclude scientifically valid and important research, it produces research without the important cultural and contextual issues that can enhance the utility and generalizability of specific findings or interventions. The goal of this review is to not only raise awareness of the small numbers of minority investigators engaged in biomedical research, but also to identify the challenges to recruiting and retaining these investigators. In this article, while we discuss issues of diversity in general, the focus will be upon the mental health aspects of the HIV epidemic for illustrative purposes: to demonstrate the issues associated with enhancing investigator diversity as a strategy for remediating the chronic shortage of historically underrepresented investigators in scientific research. After presenting the magnitude of the problem and a rationale for enhancing diversity of the biomedical research workforce, we identify a number of potential reasons and challenges for the shortage of minority investigators. Aspects of the mentoring process, together with ten key suggestions, are discussed as the backdrop for the supplement papers that follow (dealing with mentoring principles, challenges, and mentoringrelated issues on mentee, mentor, mentee-mentor relationship, and programs). By identifying these realities we hope to: (1) promote greater discussions of these challenges in academic institutions and settings; (2) suggest meaningful strategies to address these challenges; and (3) foster a national discussion about the long-term investment necessary for permanent change, as there are no easy 'fixes' for these challenges.

show abstract

Section: This Supplementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building a More Diverse Workforce in HIV/AIDS Research: The Time has Come

Stoff

Cargill

2016

AIDS Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Youth mentoring is defined as a process in which a non-parental adult or older peer, acting in a non-professional capacity, builds and maintains a supportive relationship with a young person (DuBois et al, 2011 ). Mentors provide guidance, support, and encouragement to cultivate healthy development (DuBois et al, 2011 ; Stoff, 2016 ). Mentoring has been widely adopted as an intervention strategy to promote the academic success, social-emotional growth, and career readiness of youth and to prevent harmful behaviors that lead to poor outcomes (e.g., delinquency, truancy, substance use) as young people enter adulthood (USAID, 2016 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-Mentoring to Address Youth Health: A Systematic Review

Kaufman

Levine²,

Casella

et al. 2021

Adolescent Res Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic mentoring (e-mentoring), the integration of digital technology in mentoring relationships, has recently grown in popularity; however, the effectiveness of e-mentoring in addressing youth health has not been synthesized to date. The current study synthesizes the literature on e-mentoring to affect the health and well-being of youth (10–24 years) through a systematic review and evidence quality assessment. A total of 833 records were identified, of which 14 met eligibility criteria (published in English since 1995, targeted youth health and/or youth with health issues, and communication was entirely digital or combined with in-person interaction). The results showed that the majority of health-focused e-mentoring studies were conducted with young people with existing health conditions rather than on the use of e-mentoring to promote overall health and wellness. The included programs focused largely on bringing mentoring to youth subpopulations that may be challenged by in-person models. Quality assessments of the included studies showed that the strength of the evidence is mediocre. The findings suggest that e-mentoring has the potential to reach youth with unique health concerns and to promote independent management of health conditions as youth transition to adulthood; however, more rigorous evaluation of e-mentoring programs with larger sample sizes is needed. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40894-021-00172-3.

show abstract

“…Researchers who are underrepresented minorities (URM) in health-related sciences often face unique barriers in the development of independent research careers, including the absence or inadequacy of mentoring and research collaborations. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Historically, disproportionately fewer URM scientists than white scientists have been funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or other federal agencies, with NIH data indicating that Black and Latino scientists are significantly less likely to receive R01 funding than their white counterparts, despite equivalent training and publication records. 9,10 More recent data underscore this inequity, with heightened concern for women of color researchers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%