"Biomedical Workforce Diversity: The Context for Mentoring to Develop Talents and Foster Success Within the 'Pipeline'"

Impact of a Multi-Institutional Initiative to Engage Students and Early-Stage Scholars From Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in HIV Research: The Centers for AIDS Research Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Pathway Initiative

BACKGROUND

The Centers for AIDS Research Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Pathway Initiative (CDEIPI) aims to establish programs to develop pathways for successful careers in HIV science among scholars from underrepresented racial and ethnic populations. This article describes cross-site evaluation outcomes during the first 18 months (July 2021-December 2022) across 15 programs.

METHODS

The aims of the evaluation were to characterize participants, describe feasibility, challenges, and successes of the programs and provide a basis for the generalizability of best practices to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in the United States. Two primary data collection methods were used: a quarterly programmatic monitoring process and a centrally managed, individual-level, participant quantitative and qualitative survey.

RESULTS

During the first year of evaluation data collection, 1085 racially and ethnically diverse scholars ranging from the high school to postdoctoral levels applied for CDEIPI programs throughout the United States. Of these, 257 (23.7%) were selected to participate based on program capacity and applicant qualifications. Participants were trained by 149 mentors, teachers, and staff. Of the N = 95 participants responding to the individual-level survey, 95.7% agreed or strongly agreed with statements of satisfaction with the program, 96.8% planned to pursue further education, and 73.7% attributed increased interest in a variety of HIV science topics to the program. Qualitative findings suggest strong associations between mentorship, exposure to scientific content, and positive outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence to support the feasibility and impact of novel DEI programs in HIV research to engage and encourage racially and ethnically diverse scholars to pursue careers in HIV science.

Critical Perspectives on Expanding Racial/Ethnic Diversity in the HIV Research Workforce: Comorbidities and Mentoring

HIV-related comorbidities in underrepresented minority populations are reframed to include the co-occurring problems of systemic and structural barriers, within the mentoring context as a buffer and as action-oriented. This framework is discussed to improve racial and ethnic minority diversity in the research workforce from the perspectives of HIV comorbidities and mentoring. An integrated and coordinated approach to HIV-related comorbidities and inequities may be helpful when combined with research on the social-structural contributions as drivers to diversify the research workforce. We emphasize how these key research issues (a) provide a platform for training and retraining a highly motivated, diverse workforce and (b) facilitate the empowerment of these trained individuals to conduct rigorous scientific research on social-structural factors to mitigate the effects of these comorbidities. We conclude that a diverse research workforce is necessary but insufficient for improving training-related outcomes or reducing comorbidity effects. Additional considerations are warranted that include systemic approaches and changes at the structural and institutional levels.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Research Career Advancement of Health Equity Scholars from Diverse Backgrounds

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly taxed scientific research and seems to have exacerbated existing inequities within the research field, particularly for early-stage investigators (ESIs). This study examines the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on traditionally underrepresented ESIs enrolled in an NIH-supported study evaluating the effectiveness of developmental networks, grant writing coaching, and mentoring on research career advancement. The survey consisted of 24 closed-ended (quantitative) and 4 open-ended questions (qualitative) linked to a participant's ability to meet grant submission deadlines, research and professional development disruptions, stress level, career transition level, self-efficacy and management of scholarly tasks, and familial responsibilities. Results from 32 respondents (53%) suggest that COVID-19 adversely impacted the continuity of research (81%) and grant submissions (63%). On average, grant submissions were delayed by 6.69 months (i.e., greater than one grant cycle). We also conducted additional analyses characterizing nonresponse and found that there were no significant predictors of nonresponse, indicating a limited threat to the validity of our findings. The disruption caused by COVID-19 to the careers of ESIs from underrepresented groups in the biomedical workforce has been profound in the short term. The long-term consequences to the future success of these groups are unknown but is a worthwhile area of research and potential innovation.

Comparing the Outcomes of Face-to-Face and Synchronous Online Research Mentor Training Using Propensity Score Matching

In this study, propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to examine differences in the effectiveness of research mentor training (RMT) implemented using two modes-face-to-face or synchronous online training. This study investigated each training mode and assessed participants' perceived gains in mentoring skills, ability to meet mentees' expectations, and overall quality of mentoring, as well as intention to make changes to their mentoring practices. Additional factors that may contribute to participant outcomes were also examined. In total, 152 mentors trained using a synchronous online platform and 655 mentors trained in in-person workshops were analyzed using the PSM method. Mentors were matched based on similar characteristics, including mentee's career stage, mentor's title, mentor's prior mentoring experience, mentor's race/ethnicity and sex, and mentor's years of experience; results show that both face-to-face and synchronous online modes of RMT are effective. Findings indicated that the training mode did not significantly impact the mentors' perceived training outcomes. Factors associated with the reported training outcomes included dosage (hours of training), facilitator effectiveness, race/ethnicity, and previous mentoring experience. The results of this study demonstrate that mentors' perceived training outcomes are comparable regardless of the training modality used-online versus face-to-face.

A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Gender and Career Status Differences in the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Underrepresented Postdoctoral Fellows and Early-Career Faculty

PURPOSE

The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in the biomedical workforce is pronounced and those from underrepresented backgrounds encounter more challenges than their majority counterparts. The extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on early-career investigators from underrepresented backgrounds is not yet fully understood. To examine the impact of the pandemic on underrepresented early-career biomedical researchers, this study evaluated differences in productivity, research, and psychological well-being by gender and career status.

METHOD

This was a cross-sectional analysis of preintervention data, collected in September-October 2020, from 220 participants enrolled in the Building Up a Diverse Biomedical Research Workforce study. Participants were from 25 academic medical centers in the United States and were underrepresented early-career researchers. The primary outcomes were agreement on a 5-point Likert scale with pandemic impact statements (e.g., "The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted my ability to conduct research"). Thematic analysis was conducted on responses to 2 open-ended questions assessing the pandemic's impact.

RESULTS

Most participants were female (79.9%), of non-Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish origin Black/African American (33.2%) or Hispanic/Latinx/Spanish origin (34.1%), and early-career faculty (53.4%). Over half of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the COVID-19 pandemic impacted their ability to work (55.7%) and conduct research (70.7%). Themes from qualitative analysis suggested lower research productivity, concerns about the academic job market and funding, and psychological distress due to the pandemic. Women were more likely to attribute lost productivity and psychological distress to homeschooling and childcare responsibilities. Postdoctoral fellows were concerned about more competition for fewer academic positions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of early-career underrepresented biomedical researchers, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely felt by participants, varying by gender and career status. For those postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty who are underrepresented, it is critical for institutions to offer flexibility in their positions.

Assuring data quality in investigator-initiated trials in dutch hospitals: Balancing between mentoring and monitoring

The complexity of regulations governing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) places a great burden on hospitals. Consequently, many hospitals seek to alleviate regulatory pressures by seeking an alternative quality management system (QMS). This paper takes the Netherlands as a case. To investigate how QMSs for IITs are organized in Dutch hospitals, we adopted the theoretical concepts of mentoring and monitoring in a mixed methods study in the period 2014-2018. In clinical practice and international guidelines, monitoring is seen as the standard quality assurance for ongoing trials. However, hospitals have implemented monitoring programs that resemble mentoring. The contrast between these ideal types is less pronounced in practice as both combine elements of compliance and feedback for learning in practice. In a monitoring setting, learning is one-way, from monitor to researcher; whereas mentoring focuses on mutual support and learning. To tackle problems in each system, the authority of the Board of Directors (BoD) and the BoD's relationship with staff members are crucial. We discuss the challenges that BoD and staff face in keeping an integrated view of the various components of QMSs.

The impact of social unrest due to systemic racism on underrepresented post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty

Introduction:

Social unrest tied to racism negatively impacted half of NIH-funded extramural researchers underrepresented (UR) in science. UR early-career scientists encounter more challenges in their research careers, but the impact of social unrest due to systemic racism in this group is unclear. We used mixed methods to describe the impact of social unrest due to systemic racism on mentoring relationships, research, and psychological well-being in UR post-doctoral fellows and early-career faculty.

Methods:

This is a cross-sectional analysis of data collected in September 2021–January 2022 from 144 UR early-career researchers from 25 academic medical centers in the Building Up Trial. The primary outcomes were agreement on five-point Likert scales with social unrest impact statements (e.g., “I experienced psychological distress due to events of social unrest regarding systemic racism”). Thematic analysis was conducted on responses to one open-ended question assessing how social unrest regarding systemic racism affected participants.

Results:

Most participants were female (80%), non-Hispanic Black (35%), or Hispanic (40%). Over half of participants (57%) experienced psychological distress as a result of social unrest due to systemic racism. Participants described direct and indirect discrimination and isolation from other persons of color at their institutions. Twice as many participants felt their mentoring relationships were positively (21%) versus negatively (11%) impacted by social unrest due to systemic racism.

Conclusions:

Experiences with racial bias and discrimination impact the career and well-being of UR early-career researchers. Mentoring relationships and institutional support play an important role in buffering the negative impact of racial injustice for this population.

Recruiting underrepresented individuals in a double pandemic: Lessons learned in a randomized control trial

The Building Up Trial is a cluster-randomized trial that aims to address the issue of the leaky career pathway for underrepresented (UR) faculty in biomedical fields. Regulatory approval and recruitment for the Building Up Trial took place during the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-racism movement. The pandemic and anti-racism movement personally and professionally impacted the target population and made recruitment challenging at both the institution and participant level. The target sample size for this study was 208 postdoctoral fellows or early-career faculty across 26 predominately white institutions. Challenges and adaptations are described. The Building Up Trial was delayed by 3 months. In total, 225 participants from 26 institutions were enrolled. Participants are predominately female (80%), Hispanic/Latinx (34%) or non-Hispanic/Latinx Black (33%), and early-career faculty (53%). At the institution level, obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval through a single Institutional Review Board (sIRB) posed the biggest challenge. We adapted to COVID-19-related challenges through simplifying sIRB forms, modifying study practices, and increasing communication with institutions. Recruiting UR postdoctoral fellows and faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic and anti-racism movement was challenging but not impossible. Studies should be prepared to modify study and recruitment policies to overcome additional barriers posed by the pandemics.

The Association Between NRMN STAR Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy and Grant Submission

Background

Eliminating the NIH funding gap among underrepresented minorities (URMs) remains a high priority for the National Institutes of Health. In 2014, the National Research Mentoring Network¹ Steps Toward Academic Research (NRMN STAR) program recruited postdoctoral, early-stage and junior faculty to participate in a 12-month grant writing and professional development program. The expectation of the program was to increase the number of grant submissions and awards to URM researchers. Although receiving a grant award is the gold standard of NRMN STAR, instilling confidence for postdocs and early-stage faculty to submit an application is a critical first step. Based on our previous study, a sustained increase in trainee self-efficacy score over a 24-month period was observed after completing NRMN STAR.

Methods

The current study sought to determine the association between self-efficacy score and grant submissions among two cohorts of trainees. Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy was measured using a 19-item questionnaire previously described by and used in our own work, which was originally adapted from an 88-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory.² A binary variable was created to identify trainees who submitted an initial or revised proposal vs those who abandoned their proposal or were still writing. Trainees were assessed prior to and following program completion with subsequent assessments at 6 and 12 months beyond participation.

Results

As of June 20, 2019, 12 of the 21 (57%) trainees had submitted a grant proposal (eg, NIH, other federal or non-federal grant). For every point increase in 12-month post assessments, Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy scores across all domains had a 44% higher prevalence of submitting a grant after controlling for race, sex, education level, academic rank, research experience, duration of postdoctoral training, institution type, and NRMN STAR cohort.

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrate that NRMN STAR had a positive impact on trainees' confidence in grant writing and professional development activities, which resulted in higher grant submission rates.

Teaching Undergraduates to Communicate Science, Cultivate Mentoring Relationships, and Navigate Science Culture

The historic underrepresentation of women, certain racial and ethnic minorities, and members of other marginalized groups in careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) reflects a disproportionate exit of individuals from these academic and career paths due to both environmental and personal factors. To transition successfully from classroom-based learning to the research environment, students must acquire various forms of capital nested within a largely hidden curriculum that most scientists learn informally. We have developed a semester-long course for undergraduate researchers that makes explicit concepts and strategies that contribute to STEM persistence. The course teaches skills for: 1) scientific communication; 2) maximizing the effectiveness of research mentoring relationships; and 3) navigating scientific culture and its interactions with multiple social identities. We offered the course for three consecutive semesters at the University of Massachusetts Boston to 33 students from different backgrounds, academic majors, and educational experiences. Quantitative and qualitative assessments demonstrated student learning in all three areas of emphasis. By deliberately combining instruction and practice in skills, such as those needed to present and critique scientific research, with skills needed to optimize personal interactions and key research relationships, we have created a novel learning experience to promote persistence in STEM.

Preparing for tenure and promotion at PUI institutions

In this paper, we discuss the importance for faculty to become familiar with the general guidelines for collecting, assembling and preparing a tenure and promotion (T&P) application or dossier at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution (PUI) and the critical role that mentoring plays throughout the T&P process. While key elements of the application process such as submission timelines and documentation guidelines are usually outlined in the faculty handbook of the specific institution, many aspects of assembling the dossier are not necessarily detailed in writing anywhere. Instead, there are important elements of the T&P process that typically rely on institutional knowledge and guidance that is often communicated informally. Junior faculty who have limited access to "informal communications" are at a significant disadvantage when they go through the T&P process even when they show accomplishments in teaching effectiveness, research, and service. The problem is especially important for women and underrepresented minority faculty in STEM disciplines that are less well represented among senior faculty in STEM. Senior faculty often serve as informal or formal mentors to their less seasoned colleagues. The goal of this article is to help demystify the T&P process by offering practical suggestions and describing some of the specific materials and steps that are an important part of documenting the development of a faculty member at a PUI.

Gains and Losses in Virtual Mentorship: A Descriptive Case Study of Undergraduate Mentees and Graduate Mentors in STEM Research during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Participating in mentored undergraduate research experiences can improve students' grade point averages, retention, and job placement. Graduate students also benefit from serving as mentors, as they gain teaching and research management experience. In early 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic caused many institutions to shut down physical work spaces and move research and teaching online. In this study, we explore how graduate student mentors and undergraduate student mentees at Washington University in St. Louis adapted to virtual research mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined changes in mentoring methods, research productivity, and the impact on the future plans of both mentors and mentees across six science/engineering departments. Survey responses from 79 mentees and 38 mentors indicated that a majority of mentees were able to have meaningful and productive virtual mentoring experiences, while other mentors failed to adequately involve their mentees in continued mentoring. Focusing virtual research experiences on activities such as literature review and data analysis and collaborating on goal setting can serve as a way for mentors to engage mentees even when they are unable to access lab equipment. Data from the present study reveal opportunities and challenges of virtual mentoring and can be used to inform effective research mentoring practices in the future.

Delivering What We PROMISED: Outcomes of a Coaching and Leadership Fellowship for Mentors of Underrepresented Mentees

Research demonstrates that mentorship can significantly improve career success, career satisfaction, and persistence for underrepresented (UR) minority faculty. However, many UR faculty members do not receive the mentorship they need, nor do mentors always possess the range of skills required to guide UR mentees through the unique challenges they face. We developed a 1-year fellowship training program, PROMISED, designed to help mentors promote career self-authorship and leadership among their UR mentees. PROMISED fellows participated in a two-day in-person training to develop career coaching skills, followed by a series of one-month leadership training/mentoring modules. We assessed mentors’ skills at the start and completion of the program. We found that PROMISED fellows reported an increase in perceived skill level in nearly every training topic, with “addressing diversity” demonstrating the most significant change. These results provide evidence that career coaching and leadership training offer an effective supplement to traditional mentor training and that mentors can incorporate these skills effectively into their mentoring practice. Taken together, we believe our data suggest that a program designed to train mentors in coaching and leadership can enhance career satisfaction, persistence, and retention of their UR mentees.

Leveraging a collaborative consortium model of mentee/mentor training to foster career progression of underrepresented postdoctoral researchers and promote institutional diversity and inclusion

Changing institutional culture to be more diverse and inclusive within the biomedical academic community is difficult for many reasons. Herein we present evidence that a collaborative model involving multiple institutions of higher education can initiate and execute individual institutional change directed at enhancing diversity and inclusion at the postdoctoral researcher (postdoc) and junior faculty level by implementing evidence-based mentoring practices. A higher education consortium, the Big Ten Academic Alliance, invited individual member institutions to send participants to one of two types of annual mentor training: 1) “Mentoring-Up” training for postdocs, a majority of whom were from underrepresented groups; 2) Mentor Facilitator training—a train-the-trainer model—for faculty and senior leadership. From 2016 to 2019, 102 postdocs and 160 senior faculty and administrative leaders participated. Postdocs reported improvements in their mentoring proficiency (87%) and improved relationships with their PIs (71%). 29% of postdoc respondents transitioned to faculty positions, and 85% of these were underrepresented and 75% were female. 59 out of the 120 faculty and administrators (49%) trained in the first three years provided mentor training on their campuses to over 3000 undergraduate and graduate students, postdocs and faculty within the project period. We conclude that early stage biomedical professionals as well as individual institutions of higher education benefited significantly from this collaborative mentee/mentor training model

Race and Ethnicity in Biology Research Mentoring Relationships

This case study investigated how mentors and mentees in biology experience and understand race and ethnicity in their research mentoring relationships. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with mentors (n = 23) and mentees (n = 15) who had participated in an undergraduate biology summer research opportunity program at a large Midwestern research-intensive university. Interview transcripts were coded using an inductive, thematic analysis. Themes that emerged are presented, describing both participants' experiences with and beliefs about race and ethnicity in research training contexts (e.g., mentoring relationships, lab and field experiences). Although similarities were identified, the experiences and beliefs of mentors and mentees were not always aligned. Implications of the findings for training interventions and institutional partnerships to enhance the effectiveness of research mentoring relationships are discussed, with the goal of positively impacting the educational success of students from historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in science career pathways.

A systematic scoping review of ethical issues in mentoring in medical schools

BACKGROUND

Mentoring provides mentees and mentors with holistic support and research opportunities. Yet, the quality of this support has been called into question amidst suggestions that mentoring is prone to bullying and professional lapses. These concerns jeopardise mentoring's role in medical schools and demand closer scrutiny.

METHODS

To better understand prevailing concerns, a novel approach to systematic scoping reviews (SSR) s is proposed to map prevailing ethical issues in mentoring in an accountable and reproducible manner. Ten members of the research team carried out systematic and independent searches of PubMed, Embase, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Scopus, OpenGrey and Mednar databases. The individual researchers employed 'negotiated consensual validation' to determine the final list of articles to be analysed. The reviewers worked in three independent teams. One team summarised the included articles. The other teams employed independent thematic and content analysis respectively. The findings of the three approaches were compared. The themes from non-evidence based and grey literature were also compared with themes from research driven data.

RESULTS

Four thousand six titles were reviewed and 51 full text articles were included. Findings from thematic and content analyses were similar and reflected the tabulated summaries. The themes/categories identified were ethical concerns, predisposing factors and possible solutions at the mentor and mentee, mentoring relationship and/or host organisation level. Ethical concerns were found to stem from issues such as power differentials and lack of motivation whilst predisposing factors comprised of the mentor's lack of experience and personality conflicts. Possible solutions include better program oversight and the fostering of an effective mentoring environment.

CONCLUSIONS

This structured SSR found that ethical issues in mentoring occur as a result of inconducive mentoring environments. As such, further studies and systematic reviews of mentoring structures, cultures and remediation must follow so as to guide host organisations in their endeavour to improve mentoring in medical schools.

Interventions to Optimize Mentoring Relationships for Diverse Biomedical Researchers

The articles in this special issue provide insights from a variety of mentoring interventions that were implemented across the NIH Diversity Program Consortium (DPC). Many of the articles highlight examples of how the Entering Mentoring and Entering Research curricular materials, available through the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), were adapted and implemented for research mentors and research trainees at Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) institutions. Other articles report the outcomes of programs developed and offered more broadly by the NRMN. This overview provides background information on NIH DPC-wide efforts and the Entering Mentoring and Entering Research curricula.

A systematic scoping review of ethical issues in mentoring in internal medicine, family medicine and academic medicine

Mentoring's role in medical education is threatened by the potential abuse of mentoring relationships. Particularly affected are mentoring relationships between senior clinicians and junior doctors which lie at the heart of mentoring. To better understand and address these concerns, a systematic scoping review into prevailing accounts of ethical issues and professional lapses in mentoring is undertaken. Arksey and O'Malley's (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19-32, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was employed to explore the scope of ethical concerns in mentoring in general medicine. Databases searcheed included PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, Embase, Scopus, Mednar and OpenGrey. 3391 abstracts were identified from the initialy search after removal of duplicates, 412 full-text articles were reviewed, 98 articles were included and thematically analysed. Unsatisfactory matching, misaligned expectations, inadequate mentor training, cursory codes of conduct, sketchy standards of practice, meagre oversight and unstructured processes have been identified as potential causes for ethical and professional breaches in mentoring practice. Changes in how professionalism is viewed suggest further studies of educational culture should also be carried out. The host organization plays a major role in establishing codes of conduct, expectations, and holistically, longitudinally oversight of the mentoring process and mentoring relationships.

Scientific Societies Advancing STEM Workforce Diversity: Lessons and Outcomes from the Minorities Affairs Committee of the American Society for Cell Biology

Promoting diversity and inclusiveness in the STEM academic workforce remains a key challenge and national priority. Scientific societies can play a significant role in this process through the creation and implementation of programs to foster STEM academic workforce diversification, and by providing mentoring and skills development training that empower scientists from under-represented minority (URM) backgrounds to succeed in their communities of practice. In this article, we provide examples of challenges met by scientific societies in these areas and present data from the American Society for Cell Biology, highlighting the benefits received by trainees through long-term engagement with its programs. The success of these initiatives illustrates the impact of discipline-specific programming by scientific societies in supporting the development of URM scientists and an increasingly diverse and inclusive academic STEM community.

Broadening and Strengthening Underrepresented Group Inclusion in Immunological Research

Promoting diversity across biomedical fields is crucial for building comprehensive and innovative research programs, as well as providing trainees from underrepresented groups (URGs) the ability to establish agency and develop skills in a culturally and structurally supportive environment. Despite this awareness, there is still a lack of students from URGs being trained for independent research careers. The Immunology, Microbiology, and Virology (IMV) graduate program at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry (URSMD) has been working for the last 13 years to increase diversity through an NIH funded Post-baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP). Historically, our program has trained URG scholars in Immunology, but as we have progressed we have embraced the understanding that both the scholars and the institution benefit from expanding the interdisciplinary nature of our program. Over the last 3 years, we have integrated a broader and highly collaborative faculty mentor pool, including representation from Immunology, Microbiology, Virology, Neuroscience, Genetics, Biochemistry, Biophysics, Toxicology, and Biomedical Engineering. This expansion, coupled with changes in our education program, including skill building workshops and cross campus integration with our student diversity groups and the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, has strengthened the competitiveness and success of our cohorts. These improvements are enhancing the diversity of our graduate school, creating a research environment that retains students from URGs in biomedical research. We attribute our success to the interdisciplinary and team-building nature of our pipeline program, as well as the URSMD's initiatives to be a more inclusive and equitable institution.

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

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.

Developing a Training Program to Diversify the Biomedical Research Workforce

The National Institutes of Health has made considerable investments to diversify the biomedical research workforce. Towards this goal, the authors partnered with representatives from several minority-serving institutions (MSIs) to develop training for the next generation of researchers. To ensure the most effective training program, the authors conducted a needs assessment with junior and senior investigators from the partnering MSIs. In 2016, the authors conducted focus groups and interviews with 23 junior investigators as well as in-depth interviews with 6 senior investigators from the partnering institutions with the goal of identifying specific areas of training and support that would help junior investigators at MSIs develop and sustain research careers. The data were transcribed and coded, and thematic analysis was conducted. The authors determined four areas in which training and support were needed: training in the "informal curriculum" (skills not covered in traditional clinical research courses), protected time for research training, opportunities to create career-advancing work products, and networking opportunities. The themes that were identified informed the development of the LEADS (Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success) program. The program consists of 10 instructor-led online modules each lasting approximately one month in duration with weekly synchronous sessions. Scholars are expected to be able to devote at least 20% of their time to the program.

A new approach to mentoring for research careers: the National Research Mentoring Network

Background and purpose

Effective mentorship is critical to the success of early stage investigators, and has been linked to enhanced mentee productivity, self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. The mission of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) is to provide all trainees across the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences with evidence-based mentorship and professional development programming that emphasizes the benefits and challenges of diversity, inclusivity, and culture within mentoring relationships, and more broadly the research workforce. The purpose of this paper is to describe the structure and activities of NRMN.

Key highlights

NRMN serves as a national training hub for mentors and mentees striving to improve their relationships by better aligning expectations, promoting professional development, maintaining effective communication, addressing equity and inclusion, assessing understanding, fostering independence, and cultivating ethical behavior. Training is offered in-person at institutions, regional training, or national meetings, as well as via synchronous and asynchronous platforms; the growing training demand is being met by a cadre of NRMN Master Facilitators. NRMN offers career stage-focused coaching models for grant writing, and other professional development programs. NRMN partners with diverse stakeholders from the NIH-sponsored Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), as well as organizations outside the DPC to work synergistically towards common diversity goals. NRMN offers a virtual portal to the Network and all NRMN program offerings for mentees and mentors across career development stages. NRMNet provides access to a wide array of mentoring experiences and resources including MyNRMN, Guided Virtual Mentorship Program, news, training calendar, videos, and workshops. National scale and sustainability are being addressed by NRMN "Coaches-in-Training" offerings for more senior researchers to implement coaching models across the nation. "Shark Tanks" provide intensive review and coaching for early career health disparities investigators, focusing on grant writing for graduate students, postdoctoral trainees, and junior faculty.

Implications

Partners from diverse perspectives are building the national capacity and sparking the institutional changes necessary to truly diversify and transform the biomedical research workforce. NRMN works to leverage resources towards the goals of sustainability, scalability, and expanded reach.

Using collaborative approaches with a multi-method, multi-site, multi-target intervention: evaluating the National Research Mentoring Network

Background and purpose

The NIH-funded National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) aims to increase the representation and success of underrepresented groups (URGs) in biomedical research by enhancing the training and career development of individuals from diverse backgrounds, communities, and cultures. The national scope of NRMN, its wide array of innovative programs in mentor and mentee matching and training across the career spectrum, requires a collaborative evaluation strategy that addresses both internal and external evaluation needs. Due to the variety of programs implemented for each target group, the NRMN program is responsible for its own process and short-term outcome evaluations and the national Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC) is responsible for assessing the medium and long-term effectiveness of the implemented strategies and program sustainability. Using a collaborative, utilization-focused evaluation framework, both internal NRMN evaluators and the CEC are working to translate findings into information that can be used to make both short term and long-term decisions about the efficacy and reach of the NRMN model. This important information can then inform efforts to institutionalize the current programs and potentially replicate them elsewhere.

Program and key highlights

The overall evaluation of NRMN is guided by both outcome and process questions that are tailored for each target group. The different target groups include faculty and others who serve as mentors, mentees across academic training and career stages, and researchers without a history of independently funded research. NRMN is also building the capacity for training those pursuing biomedical careers by developing “master trainers” for both mentoring and grantsmanship programs in organizations and institutions that can support expanded training efforts aimed at diversifying the biomedical workforce.

Implications

Results of this evaluation will be used to inform the design and implementation of sustainable, effective, and comprehensive mentoring and career development initiatives that promote diversity in the biomedical research workforce. Our collaborative evaluation design, theoretically-derived measurement instruments, efficient data systems, and timely reporting serve as an example of how to put evaluation principles described into practice for large, multi-site, and multi-dimensional research training programs like NRMN.

The future of graduate and postdoctoral training in the biosciences

This article summarizes the outcomes of the second national conference on the Future of Bioscience Graduate and Postdoctoral Training. Five topics were addressed during the conference: diversity in leadership positions; mentoring; modernizing the curriculum; experiential learning; and the need for better data on trainees. The goal of the conference was to develop a consensus around these five topics and to recommend policies that can be implemented by academic and research institutions and federal funding agencies in the United States.

The Health Equity Leadership Institute (HELI): Developing workforce capacity for health disparities research

Introduction

Efforts to address health disparities and achieve health equity are critically dependent on the development of a diverse research workforce. However, many researchers from underrepresented backgrounds face challenges in advancing their careers, securing independent funding, and finding the mentorship needed to expand their research.

Methods

Faculty from the University of Maryland at College Park and the University of Wisconsin-Madison developed and evaluated an intensive week-long research and career-development institute—the Health Equity Leadership Institute (HELI)—with the goal of increasing the number of underrepresented scholars who can sustain their ongoing commitment to health equity research.

Results

In 2010-2016, HELI brought 145 diverse scholars (78% from an underrepresented background; 81% female) together to engage with each other and learn from supportive faculty. Overall, scholar feedback was highly positive on all survey items, with average agreement ratings of 4.45-4.84 based on a 5-point Likert scale. Eighty-five percent of scholars remain in academic positions. In the first three cohorts, 73% of HELI participants have been promoted and 23% have secured independent federal funding.

Conclusions

HELI includes an evidence-based curriculum to develop a diverse workforce for health equity research. For those institutions interested in implementing such an institute to develop and support underrepresented early stage investigators, a resource toolbox is provided.

Providing Social Support for Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Minority PhD Students in the Biomedical Sciences: A Career Coaching Model

Improvement in the proportion of underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities (URMs) in academic positions has been unsatisfactory. Although this is a complex problem, one key issue is that graduate students often rely on research mentors for career-related support, the effectiveness of which can be variable. We present results from a novel academic career "coaching" intervention, one aim of which was to provide supplementary social support for PhD students, particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds. Coaching was delivered both within small groups and on an individual basis, with a diverse group of coaches and students coming from many universities. Coaches were provided with additional diversity training. Ninety-six semistructured interviews with 33 URM students over 3 years were analyzed using a qualitative framework approach. For most of the URM PhD students, coaching provided social support in the form of emotional, informational, and appraisal support. Coaching groups provided a noncompetitive environment and "community of support" within which students were able to learn from one another's experiences and discuss negative and stressful experiences related to their graduate school, lab, or career plans. This coached peer group model is capable of providing the social support that many URM students do not find at their home universities.

Shifting the HIV Training and Research Paradigm to Address Disparities in HIV Outcomes

Tailored programs to diversify the pool of HIV/AIDS investigators and provide sufficient training and support for minority investigators to compete successfully are uncommon in the US and abroad. This paper encourages a shift in the HIV/AIDS training and research paradigm to effectively train and mentor Latino researchers in the US, Latin America and the Caribbean. We suggest three strategies to accomplish this: (1) coaching senior administrative and academic staff of HIV/AIDS training programs on the needs, values, and experiences unique to Latino investigators; (2) encouraging mentors to be receptive to a different set of research questions and approaches that Latino researchers offer due to their life experiences and perspectives; and (3) creating a virtual infrastructure to share resources and tackle challenges faced by minority researchers. Shifts in the research paradigm to include, retain, and promote Latino HIV/AIDS researchers will benefit the scientific process and the patients and communities who await the promise of HIV/AIDS research.

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

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 mentoring-related 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.

Future HIV Mentoring Programs to Enhance Diversity

This paper proposes a general template to guide future mentoring program development addressing: (i) considerations to ensure an adequate research workforce; (ii) key guidelines and principles of mentoring; and (iii) use of a logic model to develop program milestones, outcomes and evaluation. We focus on these areas to guide and inform the most effective mentoring program components, which we find to be more helpful than identifying specific features and ingredients. Although the focus is on the development of a new generation of investigators from diverse backgrounds, this template may also apply to mentoring programs for other investigators and for disciplines beyond HIV.

Navigating Opportunities, Learning and Potential Threats: Mentee Perspectives on Mentoring in HIV Research

Increasing the diversity of the HIV research workforce remains a priority for research and funding organizations in the US. Mentorship is a vital component for early-career investigators, especially for underrepresented racial/ethnic and sexual minority HIV investigators. These investigators face unique social and structural challenges to developing and fostering mentorship relationships, as well as building a solid foundation for a successful career in HIV research. This article provides a perspective from four Black early-career investigators, supplemented with comments from 15 underrepresented investigators in the US, as they reflect on their needs, challenges, contributions, and successes in finding the right mentor and mentorship environment, balancing the opportunities for, and "threats" to success, as well as providing mentorship to other underrepresented and aspiring HIV investigators. Mentorship programs must address these needs and challenges while building on the strengths of underrepresented HIV investigators in order to improve recruitment, retention and ultimately the pipeline of these researchers.