Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Welch, Julie L.; Sawtelle, Stacy; Cheng, David; Perkins, Anthony J.; Ownbey, Misha; MacNeill, Emily; Hockberger, Robert S.; Rusyniak, Daniel E.

doi:10.1111/acem.13136

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Having new mentors shadow and then mentored by senior mentors provides training and support for new mentors [11,113,114]. Though pairing mentors to mentees was primarily mentee-initiated and based on research and career interests and/or skills [113], Bland et al (2015) reported that matching resulted in higher research activity while Shollen et al (2014) found that menteeinitiated matching resulted in increased career satisfaction. A combined matching process has been proposed as a means of reducing mismatches and failed relationships [115,116].…”

Section: Modes Of Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

Sheri

Too

Chuah

et al. 2018

Medical Education Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective mentoring enhances the personal and professional development of mentees and mentors, boosts the reputation of host organizations and improves patient outcomes. Much of this success hinges upon the mentor’s ability to nurture personalized mentoring relationships and mentoring environments, provide effective feedback and render timely, responsive, appropriate, and personalized support. However, mentors are often untrained raising concerns about the quality and oversight of mentoring support.To promote effective and consistent use of mentor training in medical education, this scoping review asks what mentor training programs are available in undergraduate and postgraduate medicine and how they may inform the creation of an evidenced-based framework for mentor training.Six reviewers adopted Arksey and O’Malley’s approach to scoping reviews to study prevailing mentor-training programs and guidelines in postgraduate education programs and in medical schools. The focus was on novice mentoring approaches. Six reviewers carried out independent searches with similar inclusion/exclusion criteria using PubMed, ERIC, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and grey literature databases. Included were theses and book chapters published in English or had English translations published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2017. Braun and Clarke’s approach to thematic analysis was adopted to circumnavigate mentoring’s and mentor training’s evolving, context-specific, goal-sensitive, learner-, tutor- and relationally dependent nature that prevents simple comparisons of mentor training across different settings and mentee and mentor populations.In total, 3585 abstracts were retrieved, 232 full-text articles were reviewed, 68 articles were included and four themes were identified including the structure, content, outcomes and evaluation of mentor training program.The themes identified provide the basis for an evidence-based, practice-guided framework for a longitudinal mentor training program in medicine and identifies the essential topics to be covered in mentor training programs.

show abstract

Section: Modes Of Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

Sheri

Too

Chuah

et al. 2018

Medical Education Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Departments with focused mentoring programs result in increased NIH funding success, increased number of publications, and higher levels of perceived success. 22 Academic EDs that may not have NIH-funded scientists on faculty, specifically in rural areas, may have important and fundable priorities to study. Targeted interventions that extend resources to traditionally less research heavy institutions (eg, seed funding for preliminary data, and a network of available mentors willing to work with new investigators at remote sites) can create equitable opportunities for research careers across the country.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Federal Funding in Emergency Medicine: Demographics and Perspectives of Awardees

Chai

Carreiro

Chapman

et al. 2020

WestJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Emergency physicians face multiple challenges to obtaining federal funding. The objective of this investigation was to describe the demographics of federally-funded emergency physicians and identify key challenges in obtaining funding. Methods: We conducted a retrospective database search of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool (NIH RePORTER) to collect data regarding the distribution and characteristics of federally-funded grants awarded to emergency medicine (EM) principal investigators between 2010-2017. An electronic survey was then administered to the identified investigators to obtain additional demographic data, and information regarding their career paths, research environment, and perceived barriers to obtaining federal funding. Results: We identified 219, corresponding to 51 unique, mentored career development awardees and 105 independent investigators. Sixty-two percent of investigators responded to the electronic survey. Awardees were predominantly White males, although a larger portion of the mentored awardee group was female. Greater than half of respondents reported their mentor to be outside of the field of EM. The most common awarding institution was the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Respondents identified barriers in finding adequate mentorship, time to gather preliminary data, and the quality of administrative support. Conclusion: The last five years have showed a trend toward increasing grants awarded to EM investigators; however, we identified several barriers to funding. Initiatives geared toward support and mentorship of junior faculty, particularly to females, minorities, and those in less heavily funded areas of the country are warranted. [West J Emerg Med. 2020;21(2)304-312.]

show abstract

“…To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the Step Back method for education research consultation. Given that clinician educators often face multiple competing demands for their time and may have limited local education research expertise available, this type of faculty development holds great potential to advance the field by providing instruction in education research methodology, dedicated feedback specific to an individual's project and needs, and an opportunity for collaboration and mentorship that might not have otherwise been accessible …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the “Step‐back” Method for Education Research Consultation at the National Level: A Pilot Study

Jordan

Shah

Phillips

et al. 2019

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There are a limited number of emergency medicine (EM) physicians with expertise in education research. The Harvard Macy "step-back" method is an emerging model utilized to gather group feedback. Despite its use in multiple educational settings, there are little published data demonstrating effectiveness.Objectives: Our objective was to create and evaluate a national faculty development session providing consultation in education research utilizing the step-back method.Methods: This was a pilot study. EM experts in education research from across the country served as facilitators for a faculty development session held at the 2018 Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academic Assembly. Small groups consisting of two or three facilitators and one or two participants were formed and each participant underwent a step-back consultation for their education research study. Participants wrote their study question before and after the session. After the session, facilitators and participants completed an evaluative survey consisting of multiple-choice, Likert-type, and free-response items. Descriptive statistics were reported. Qualitative analysis using a thematic approach was performed on free-response data. Participant study questions were assessed by the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) and FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, relevant) criteria. Both scales were evaluated using a two-way randomconsistency intraclass correlation. Before and after scores were evaluated with a paired t-test.Results: Twenty-four facilitators and 13 participants completed the step-back session. Evaluations from 20 facilitators and nine participants were submitted and analyzed. Sixteen of 20 facilitators felt that the step-back method "greatly facilitated" their ability to share their education research expertise. All facilitators and participants recommended that the session be provided at a future academic assembly. Regarding suggestions for improvement, qualitative analysis revealed three major themes: praise for the session, desire for additional time, and a room set up more conducive to small group work. Seven of nine responding participants felt that the session was "very valuable" for improving the strength of their study methods. Qualitative analysis regarding change in study as a result of the step-back session yielded four major themes: refinement of study question, more specific outcomes and measurements, improvement in study design, and greater understanding of study limitations. Both FINER and PICO scale comparisons showed improvement pre-and postintervention (PICO 60% relative increase; FINER 16% relative increase). Neither achieved statistical significance (PICO t(5) = -1.835, p = 0.126; and FINER t(5) = -1.305, p = 0.249).

show abstract

Faculty Mentoring Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine

Cited by 20 publications

References 34 publications

A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

Federal Funding in Emergency Medicine: Demographics and Perspectives of Awardees

Use of the “Step‐back” Method for Education Research Consultation at the National Level: A Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About