A model for faculty mentoring in academic radiology

Illes, Judy; Glover, Gary H.; Wexler, Lewis; Leung, Ann N.; Glazer, Gary M.

doi:10.1016/s1076-6332(00)80529-2

Cited by 94 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is because they are often guided by their mentors and have a better awareness of the roles that they are engaged in. 27,28 Support and Guidance Our participants described how mentors provide guidance and support to novice faculty as they navigate their faculty responsibilities. This theme of guidance and support has been previously identified as a key role of mentorship as an individual transitions to a new role such as preceptor, 8,9,29 student, 7,30 or clinician.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, 52% of novice faculty participating in a formal mentoring program contributed increased research productivity to their participation. 27 Authors 10,11 have generally described how novice faculty are most prepared in research compared to other areas due to the typical doctoral training they experience. Despite the general preparedness of faculty to conduct research, our findings suggest additional mentorship is still needed in this area.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Roles of Mentoring for Novice Athletic Training Faculty Members

Nottingham

Mazerolle

Barrett

2017

Athletic Training Education Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Mentorship is a valuable resource for athletic trainers who are transitioning to new roles such as a student, preceptor, or autonomous clinician. While mentorship has been identified as an important component of education, little is known about the role of mentorship during the transition from doctoral student to faculty member during the first several years in academia. Objective: Obtain faculty members' perspectives on the role of mentorship as it relates to their experiences as a tenure-track faculty member. Design: Qualitative, phenomenological research. Setting: Higher education institutions with Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education-accredited programs. Patients or Other Participants: Twelve novice faculty members (9 female, 3 male) and 12 experienced faculty members (3 female, 9 male) participated in this study. Main Outcome Measure(s): We developed and piloted an interview guide designed to gain participants' perspectives on their experiences with and perceptions of mentorship in relation to their faculty roles and responsibilities. Semistructured telephone interviews were completed with each individual and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using a phenomenological approach, and saturation was obtained. Trustworthiness was established with the use of member checking, multiple-analysts triangulation, and data source triangulation. Results: Two themes emerged regarding roles of mentorship: (1) support and guidance and (2) navigating institutional politics and expectations. Mentors supported novice faculty members in their responsibilities of teaching, research, and service, particularly when mentees perceived a weakness in 1 area. Mentors also helped novice faculty members navigate the tenure and promotion process and politics of their institution. Conclusions: Mentorship appears to be an important mechanism of support for novice faculty members as they transition to their tenure-track faculty roles. Mentorship appears to be particularly valuable when there is a perceived lack of preparation for 1 aspect of a faculty position. Novice faculty members should seek out mentors within and beyond their institution for support.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roles of Mentoring for Novice Athletic Training Faculty Members

Nottingham

Mazerolle

Barrett

2017

Athletic Training Education Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only a limited number of governmentfunded projects are credited to radiologist investigators (4,9). Our specialty's lack of competitiveness in this arena is tied in part to the nature of our residency programs, in which there is little research training (4,7,(10)(11)(12).…”

Section: Background Current Standing Of Research In Academic Radiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In radiology programs, this requirement has been variably enforced. However, the existence of this requirement highlights the alliance between residents, medical students, and faculty as an important source of research (10,11,25). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Radiology Residency/PhD Program for Education of Academic Radiologists: A Response to Revitalizing the Radiology Research Enterprise

Rahal¹,

Head²,

Jung³

et al. 2007

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a 1999 RadioGraphics article (1) entitled "Revitalizing the Radiology Research Enterprise," Staab and Brady announced an initiative of the same name by the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). The Revitalizing the Radiology Research Enterprise (RRRE) is designed to help academic radiology departments strengthen their research infrastructure and clarify their research strategy (2). Our department was one of six elected in 2000 to be surveyed and assisted by the RSNA's RRRE committee. A site visit that year provided a review of our research facilities and programs. In 2001, as a response to the challenge of the RRRE, we established a fully integrated 6-year residency/PhD program. The program combines radiology residency, under the guidelines of the B. Leonard Holman Research Pathway of the American Board of Radiology (ABR), with pursuit of a doctorate degree in radiological sciences.Our program is designed to produce academic radiologists who are proficient in research and competitive for national funding. Herein, we describe the educational structure of the program and its results during its first several years. Background Current Standing of Research in Academic RadiologyAcademic radiology faces two major challenges. First, the vitality of our specialty depends on continuing innovation and discovery by research-oriented radiologists. Second, faculty recruitment by academic departments is hampered by limited resources and competition from private practice. These challenges have been attributed to several factors, including the economic restructuring of academic departments (3), the severe salary discrepancy between academic and private practice, increasing barriers to national funding (4), and the lack of research training of most physicians (4-6).Historically, most radiology research has been descriptive (4,7,8 NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript competitiveness in this arena is tied in part to the nature of our residency programs, in which there is little research training (4,7,10-12).Most radiologists in academic departments devote time to an escalating volume of clinical responsibilities, as well as to resident education, and have little time for research (4,5,13). Nonetheless, they face research requirements in university tenure tracks to achieve promotion (4,5,9). Many productive academicians sacrifice their free time for writing and research activities, and, if academicians are not located in large academic centers, they have little aid from statisticians, research associates, or scientist collaborators (4,5,7).These circumstances call attention to the crucial need to sustain the growth of radiology, to compete for national funding, and to maintain scientific standards in research. National Efforts to Strengthen Radiology ResearchThe current movement to strengthen radiology research began more than a decade ago. In 1994, a special National Institutes of Health (NIH)-cosponsored conference was held to address priorities for more than 30 areas of imaging res...

show abstract

“…The benefits of mentoring residents have been studied, [1][2][3][4][5] but there is no research about mentoring new program directors. New faculty can feel unprepared for careers in academic medicine 6,7 ; directors of internal medicine subspecialty programs in particular may be unaware of the many requirements and details of the role.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mentoring for Subspecialty Training Program Directors: An Unrecognized, Unmet Need?

Norby¹,

Karniski²,

Schmidt³

et al. 2010

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The benefits of mentoring residents have been studied, but there is no research about mentoring new program directors. Program directors' responsibilities have become increasingly complicated, and they may not be adequately prepared for their role at the time of appointment without the benefit of mentoring that is specific to their new role. Objective To assess whether nephrology subspecialty program directors were specifically mentored and whether they felt prepared for the educational and administrative aspects of this role. Methods We conducted an electronic needs assessment survey of the nephrology subspecialty program directors through the American Society of Nephrology listserv for program directors. Results The survey response rate was 42% (58 of 139). Of the respondents, 58% did not feel adequately prepared when they first became subspecialty program directors, and only 32% reported having formal or informal mentoring for the role. Individuals who had served as associate program directors (34%) were more likely to report mentoring than those who had not (P = .02). Eighty percent of respondents reported that mentoring from another nephrology program director would have been beneficial during their first several years. Conclusions This appears to be the first study specifically evaluating mentoring experiences relevant to the role of nephrology program director. As a result of this survey, the American Society of Nephrology Training Program Director Executive Committee recognized the need to provide opportunities for mentoring new nephrology program directors and formed a New Training Program Director Training and Mentoring Work Group to recommend initiatives for mentoring and training new program directors. Further investigation is needed to assess whether mentoring benefits subspecialty program directors and whether these findings can be generalized to other specialties and subspecialties.

show abstract

A model for faculty mentoring in academic radiology

Cited by 94 publications

References 5 publications

Roles of Mentoring for Novice Athletic Training Faculty Members

Roles of Mentoring for Novice Athletic Training Faculty Members

Combined Radiology Residency/PhD Program for Education of Academic Radiologists: A Response to Revitalizing the Radiology Research Enterprise

Mentoring for Subspecialty Training Program Directors: An Unrecognized, Unmet Need?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About