A Sustainable Course in Research Mentoring. Issue 5 (29th May 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Martina, Camille Anne; Mutrie, Andria; Ward, Denham; Lewis, Vivian
• Is Part Of: Clinical and translational science. Volume 7:Issue 5(2014)
• Page Start: 413
• Page End: 419
• Publication Date: 2014-05-29
• Subjects: Medicine, Experimental -- Periodicals; Medical innovations -- Periodicals; 616.027
• DOI: 10.1111/cts.12176
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1752-8054

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>In this report, we describe a six‐year experience (2007‐2012) in a single CTSA awardee institution on the development, implementation and evaluation of a hybrid online mentoring curriculum that is applicable to CTSA trainees at various levels (graduate, medical students, and junior faculty) of career training. The curriculum offers convenience, engagement, and financial sustainability. Overall, we found high levels of satisfaction with the curriculum and mentoring experience among both protégés and mentors. Qualitative data showed remarkable consensus of 14 of the 15 domains of mentoring that form the framework of the mentoring curriculum: (1) accessibility, (2) selectivity, (3) engagement/support, (4) teaching/training, (5) clarity of performance/expectations, (6) sponsorship/sharing power judiciously, (7) demystifying the system (academia), (8) challenging/encouraging risk taking, (9) affirming, (10) providing exposure/visibility, (11) being an intentional role model, (12) protecting, (13) providing feedback, (14) self‐disclosure, and lastly (15) counseling, with the fifteenth domain "counseling" being the most controversial. Quantitative survey data of both mentors and protégés indicated a high degree of overall satisfaction in their mentor‐protégé dyad with 86% (59) of protégés and 86% (55) of mentors responding good or excellent to the "quality of time spent." Mentors and protégés were most satisfied in the area of research, with 93% (62) of protégés and 96% (57) of mentors finding discussions in research very to somewhat useful for their own career advancement. Along with wide acceptability, this format is a useful option for institutions where face‐to‐face time is limited and education budgets are lean.</p> </abstract>