Identifying Components of Success Within Health Sciences-Focused Mentoring Programs Through a Review of the Literature

Abstract

Objective. To identify programmatic components and structural features associated with success of mentoring programs within the health sciences. Findings. Thirty-eight manuscripts representing 34 individual programs were reviewed. Of the institutions represented, 68% were public. Sixty-eight percent of programs included single disciplines only, with four focused in pharmacy, 13 in medicine, and six in nursing. Of the 34 individual programs, all programs reporting participant confidence and self-efficacy reported success in that domain. Eighteen programs reported outcomes related to scholarly activity that included publications or funding/ grantsmanship; 16 reported success. Eleven of 16 programs reporting promotion/tenure and/or faculty retention rates reported success. Program components associated with successful programs included frequent meetings (at least monthly) and delivering content within formal curricula. Content categories common within programs reporting success were content related to research, funding/grantsmanship and networking/collaboration. In addition, specific for the promotion/retention domain, content related to curriculum/teaching was commonly found within successful programs. Summary. Although somewhat dependent on the program's specific goals, curriculum most commonly associated with success contained content on research, grantsmanship/funding, curriculum/ teaching, and networking/collaboration. Among many programs, the reporting lacked objective, standardized metrics and often included only generalized descriptions/categorization of course content. The incomplete and inconsistent reporting limited our ability to draw conclusions regarding individual topics important for each program component. Proper planning, execution, and assessment of faculty mentoring programs is critical to the identification of additional program characteristics for optimal faculty success.Keywords: faculty mentoring, health sciences, faculty, program development, faculty development INTRODUCTIONFaculty attrition is a significant concern within the health sciences. Poor attrition rates increase both direct and indirect costs to institutions. This includes cost of the lost opportunity, new faculty recruitment efforts, and the training of inexperienced faculty. Other intangible costs include loss of faculty continuity and faculty connectedness.1 In at least one study, 34% of medical faculty resigned within three years of hire.2 Of those faculty who remained active, an additional 48% reported they were considering leaving their positions within the next five years.2 In another survey of faculty across 26 U.S. medical schools, 35% of faculty reported they had seriously considered leaving their current position during the prior year.3 Faculty leave their positions for various reasons, including lack of professional development, inclusiveness, or institutional recognition and support.2 In one report, 34% of recent former faculty at a small, private research university cited lack of mentoring as a cause of their dissat...

Pharmacy practice faculty and preceptor development

“…McRae and Zimmerman recently conducted a systematic review of health sciences‐focused mentoring programs to identify specific components and structures associated with programmatic success 100 . The review identified the importance of routine engagement with mentorship programs that demonstrate success on the basis of scholarship that was met on a monthly basis, at minimum.…”

“…More than 70% of faculty are older than 40, so regardless of definition, those advanced in their career account for most of the faculty workforce. In contrast, most mentoring and development programs target junior faculty, and many schools have inadequate local resources for mentorship of senior faculty and faculty administrators 100,101 . In academic medicine, mid‐career faculty experience significant declines in mentorship relationships and professional development opportunities 102 .…”

“…Tailor faculty development programming to apply to the audience, recognizing the changing needs of junior and senior faculty, the various needs of preceptors in different practice settings, etc 8,9,100,117 …”

Qualitative Evaluation of a Junior Faculty Team Mentoring Program

“…12,13 Although formal mentoring programs may require more resources, benefits include higher rates of faculty retention due to the structure and curriculum of the program and commitment from the mentee, mentor, and institution. 1,[13][14][15] In a recent review of faculty mentoring programs, McRae and colleagues 1 identified only four papers describing formal programs within schools of pharmacy. The described programs utilized various formats and approaches, including external faculty mentoring, 14,16 department mentoring, 17 multi-institution mentoring, 18 and voluntary mentoring.…”

Visiting Scholars Program to enhance career development among early-career KL2 investigators in Clinical and Translational Science: Implications from a quality improvement assessment

“…Faculty engagement in clinical service, education, and research is the cornerstone of academic health centers and is facilitated by faculty development opportunities at their home institutions. [3][4][5][6][7] Senior faculty are frequently invited to give presentations at other institutions, provide plenary sessions at conferences, serve on grant review boards, and assume leadership roles within professional organizations, but junior faculty have fewer opportunities. Faculty exchange programs, particularly those designed with junior faculty in mind, provide junior faculty with the opportunity to meet established researchers with similar interests outside of their own universities, develop new research collaborations, engage in joint publications, and increase their professional networks and visibility.…”