Medical student mentorship in radiation oncology at a single academic institution: A 10-year analysis

Evaluation of a National Radiation Oncology Research and Mentorship Program

PURPOSE

The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology Annual Scientific Meeting Medical Student Research and Mentorship Award was established in 2020 to support medical students pursuing radiation oncology (RO) research and RO as a career. This study is an evaluation of the effect of this national research and mentorship award on medical students, resident mentors, and research supervisors over 3 iterations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Three separate surveys were created for medical student mentees, RO resident mentors, and attending research supervisors. These surveys were developed using best practice strategies for medical education surveys and circulated for peer review among experts in oncology medical education. The surveys were sent to the 52 individuals (18 students, 18 residents, 16 supervisors) who participated in 3 cycles of Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology ASM MSRMA (2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23). After anonymization, quantitative answers were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and narrative responses were evaluated using a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

There was a 90% survey response rate. For medical student mentees, the award maintained (71%) or increased (24%) interest in pursuing an RO career. Students reported receiving helpful tips for residency applications and insight into RO residency, research, and career planning advice. Only the first student cohort currently has matching results for residency, with approximately 50% matching to RO. All resident mentor respondents felt the program either maintained or increased motivation to mentor students in RO. Research project supervisors unanimously enjoyed their role in this program and would recommend and participate in this program again.

CONCLUSIONS

A national research and mentorship award for medical students has shown a positive effect on participants. Medical students felt this award program motivated them to continue pursuing oncology research and a potential career in RO. The program also enhanced mentorship skills in residents and research supervisors, which encourages further RO mentorship, teaching, and exposure for future generations of students.

Enhancing Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Recruitment Through a Medical Student Mentorship Network: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

There is a shortage of psychiatrists necessary to meet the clinical needs of children and adolescents. Efforts over the past decade to enhance the workforce have had a limited impact. This study sought to identify the critical components of a medical student mentorship network designed to increase recruitment into the subspecialty.

METHODS

The authors conducted interviews via synchronized videoconferencing of network site leaders and medical students at 14 schools throughout the USA. In addition, they analyzed verbatim transcripts using a thematic-phenomenological qualitative approach.

RESULTS

The authors interviewed thirty-eight program participants during seven focus group sessions: nine program directors and 29 medical students or graduates, a median of five participants per session. They constructed a framework consisting of two overarching domains, comprised of three themes each: (1) life cycle of a subspecialty mentorship network (Origins, Initiation, and Continuity); and (2) next steps to improve the program (Refining goals, Increasing accessibility, and Defining a path forward).

CONCLUSION

Preliminary data have already documented the positive impact of participation in this mentorship program on medical student match rates into psychiatry. The qualitative model of this study provides a blueprint to develop, maintain, and optimize this and similar efforts aimed at increasing the child and adolescent psychiatry workforce.

Longitudinal Outcomes of Medical Student Research Mentorship: a 15-Year Analysis of the Radiation Oncology Mentorship Initiative

At our institution, students can be mentored by radiation oncology faculty through structured research programs, such as the Medical Student Summer Research Program (MSSRP). The purpose of this study is to report the research productivity of students who engaged in radiation oncology research mentorship, whether through the MSSRP or other avenues of research mentorship. We compiled a database of abstracts and manuscripts co-authored by 58 students who conducted research with radiation oncology faculty from 2005 to 2020. The means, medians, ranges, and interquartile ranges (IQR) of co-authorships and first authorships were calculated for the overall cohort and compared for MSSRP and non-MSSRP students, who matched into radiation oncology and those who did not, and male versus female students. Among all 58 students, 106 abstracts and 70 manuscripts were identified. Of those students, 54 (93.1%) published at least one abstract or manuscript. The mean number of abstract co-authorships per student was 3.07 (median 2, range 0-25, IQR 0-4), and the mean number of manuscript co-authorships per student was 2.22 (median 1, range 0-18, IQR 1-3). There were no significant differences in research output between MSSRP and non-MSSRP students or male and female students. However, the students who matched into radiation oncology published more co-author (3.67 vs. 1.63, p = 0.01) and first-author (1.62 vs. 0.53, p = 0.006) manuscripts than those who did not. Further research is warranted to assess whether skills gained from student-directed research translate into residency and beyond.

Medical Student Leadership in the Student Oncology Society: Evaluation of a Student-Run Interest Group

At our institution, we aim to foster interest in oncology through the Student Oncology Society (SOS). The SOS was formed in 2010 and since then has hosted numerous oncology-related events, such as career panels, patient survivorship celebrations, and movie screenings. The purpose of this study is to report the experiences from former student leaders of the SOS, particularly how their participation informed their career choice. Complete survey responses were obtained from 26 of 32 former SOS student leaders (response rate 81.3%). Out of the 26 respondents, 19 (73.1%) are pursuing an oncology-related specialty. The three most common competencies that were affected by participation in SOS, noted by 21 (80.8%) respondents, were learning about pathways to careers in oncology, understanding the multidisciplinary approach to cancer care, and coordinating events. By mean Likert score, the most important factors in career choice for respondents who eventually pursued an oncology field were having a mentor in oncology (4.44), a clinical rotation in oncology (4.31), research involvement (4.22), and SOS involvement (3.17). While SOS involvement played a role in career choice among our student leaders, having a mentor was cited to be the most important factor for choosing an oncology career. Thus, implementation of formal mentorship initiatives within the framework of oncology interest groups should be explored.

Mentoring Medical Students Towards Oncology: Results from a Pilot Multi-institutional Mentorship Programme

The mounting global cancer burden has generated an increasing demand for oncologists to join the workforce. Yet, students report limited oncology exposure in undergraduate medical curricula, while undergraduate oncology mentorships remain underutilised. We established an undergraduate oncology society-led mentorship programme aimed at medical students across several UK universities to increase medical student oncology exposure. We electronically recruited and paired oncologist mentors and medical student mentees and distributed a dedicated questionnaire (pre- and post-mentorship) to compare mentees' self-reported cancer specialty knowledge and oncology career motivation after undertaking a 6-week mentorship. We also determined students' interest across specialties and subspecialties and measured mentor availability via percentage programme uptake. Statistical analysis included univariate inferential tests on SPSS software. Twentynine (23.4%) of 124 oncology specialists agreed to become mentors. The mentorship was completed by 30 students across three medical schools: 16 (53.3%) Barts, 10 (33.3%) Birmingham, and 4 (13.3%) King's; 11 (36.7%) mentored by medical oncologists, 10 (33.3%) by clinical/radiation oncologists, and 9 (30%) by surgical oncologists. The mentorship generated a statically significant increase in students' knowledge of the multidisciplinary team and all oncology-related specialties including academia/research but not interest towards a career in oncology. Undergraduate oncology mentoring is an effective educational, networking and motivational tool for medical students. Student societies are a valuable asset in cultivating medical student oncology interest by connecting students to faculty and increasing mentor accessibility. Further research should focus on developing an optimal mentorship structure and evaluating long-term outcomes of such educational initiatives.

It Takes a Village: A Narrative Review of Anesthesiology Mentorship

Mentorships play a critical role in the development of physician careers and should be tailored within a structured, evidence-based mentoring program to ensure mutual benefit and avoidance of pitfalls. We offer a narrative review of the current literature and commentary on mentoring at the medical student, GME trainee, and early career faculty levels within anesthesiology, and propose a framework on which an effective mentoring program can be implemented.

Formal Mentorship as an Opportunity to Expand the Urology Pipeline: Under Represented Trainees Entering Residency (UReTER) Program Evaluation 2020-2021

OBJECTIVE

To rank percentages of underrepresented residents in surgical subspecialties and understand the experience of mentees and mentors who participated in the inaugural University of California, San Francisco Urology UnderRepresented Trainees Entering Residency (UReTER) Mentorship Program for Black, Indigenous, and/or LatinX medical students applying into urology.

METHODS

Medical student mentees across the country were recruited via social media and email listservs. Demographic information and photos of mentors were presented on the UReTER website. Medical students could choose a mentor, and once matched, both parties were notified. A survey was emailed to all participants on Urology Match Day 2021.

RESULT

The 2018 -2019 ACGME Databook showed underrepresented minority residents made up 7.6% of urology residents, lagging behind neurosurgery, vascular surgery, general surgery, and obstetrics and gynecology. 71 mentees and 101 mentors volunteered for the UReTER Mentorship Program (71 mentor-mentee couplets). Overall response rate was 51% [33 mentors and 32 mentees]. Of mentees who completed the survey, 16 (47%) participated in the 2021 Urology Match; 15 (94%) matched and 6 (38%) felt that UReTER helped them match.

CONCLUSION

Feedback on this pilot program was very positive including a high match rate among those who participated. Future changes to the program include expanded student outreach, increased structure, broadened mentor network. The implementation of a low-cost program to increase underrepresented applicants into Urology has great potential to increase representation and improve the field. This program can and should be replicated in all subspecialties.

Current Barriers in Pursuing Otolaryngology as an Osteopathic Applicant and Proposed Goals for the Future

The osteopathic (DO) medical profession has seen a substantial increase in popularity, evident by the drastic increase in the DO physician workforce and increasing number of DO graduates in the United States. Osteopathic medical schools have historically been primary care focused, resulting in a majority of their graduates pursuing practice in those specialties. This focus may be inadvertently creating a disadvantageous environment for DO students who aim to pursue specialized or traditionally competitive fields in medicine. Otolaryngology is a prime example of osteopathic underrepresentation, as there is currently a significantly low percentage of DO residents in otolaryngology residency programs and practicing DO otolaryngologists. Given the recent American Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and American Osteopathic Association (AOA) merger between osteopathic and allopathic (MD) residency programs, it is of great value to further discuss avenues for progress and mitigation of barriers.

Mentorship Initiatives in Radiation Oncology: A Scoping Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

Although mentorship is described extensively in academic medical literature, there are few descriptions of mentorship specific to radiation oncology. The goal of the current study was to investigate the state of mentorship in radiation oncology through a scoping review of the literature.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A search protocol was defined according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Predefined search terms and medical subject headings were used to search PubMed for English language articles published after January 1, 1990, on mentorship in radiation oncology. Additionally, in-press articles from major radiation oncology and medical education journals were searched. Three reviewers determined article eligibility. Included articles were classified based on predefined evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

Fourteen publications from 2008 to 2019 met inclusion criteria. The most commonly described form of mentorship was the dyad (64.3%), followed by team (14.3%) and peer (7.1%); 2 articles did not specify mentorship type (14.3%). The most commonly mentored participants were residents (35.7%), followed by medical students (35.7%) and attendings (21.4%); 1 study included participants of all levels (7.1%). Thirteen studies (92.9%) identified an experimental study design, most of which were cross-sectional (42.9%), followed by cohort studies (28.6%) and before/after (21.4%). Median sample size, reported in 12 of 13 experimental studies, was 132 (coefficient of variation, 1.06). Although outcomes varied widely, the majority described successful implementation of mentorship initiatives with high levels of participant satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Although few initiatives are currently reported, the present study suggests that these initiatives are successful in promoting career development and increasing professional satisfaction. The interventions overwhelmingly described mentorship dyads; other forms of mentorship are either less common or understudied. Limitations included interventions not being evaluated in a controlled setting, and many were assessed using surveys with low response rates. This review highlights rich opportunities for future scholarship to develop, evaluate, and disseminate radiation oncology mentorship initiatives.

A Global Perspective of Mentorship in Medical Schools: Systematic Review from 2014 to 2019

Formal mentorship programs afford medical students research involvement, career guidance, and personal and professional development. We reviewed a total of 36 studies on mentorship in medical schools, 17 of which are from the United States (US) and 19 from outside the US. This descriptive study has determined the most common mentorship models used in medical schools both in the United States and internationally. Despite variance between programs, medical students in the US and worldwide prefer highly invested mentors with strong interpersonal skills. We concluded that both US and international mentorship provide crucial professional development for students; however, US-based mentorship is more focused on providing experience within individual specialties. More studies on current mentorship practices in medical schools are required to ensure that the diverse international medical education community is better represented.

A Scoping Review of Radiation Oncology Educational and Career-Planning Interventions in Undergraduate Medical Education

Radiation oncology (RO) teaching in undergraduate medical education (UME) is lacking worldwide with potentially detrimental effects on medical student career choices and patient care. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the extent of published literature describing RO educational and career-planning interventions in UME. Online databases were searched from respective dates of inception to June 2020 for articles that reported outcomes from RO educational and career-planning interventions in UME. Two independent reviewers screened entries for inclusion. Following full-text reviews, 25 articles were analyzed. Most interventions were a single session, involved clinical medical students, and were based in North America. Didactic teaching was most commonly used, though a majority included interactive learning in addition to or in place of didactic teaching. As expected, there was a heterogeneity of outcomes reported, and most studies collected data using surveys alone. Recurring topics included the multidisciplinary nature of oncology and psychosocial oncology. There was a paucity of studies reporting on formal mentorship programs and research programs. The data collated in this study can help develop new initiatives based on what has succeeded in the past. Areas that may benefit from future studies include mentorship programs, research programs, and interventions from outside North America.

The Radiation Oncology Mentorship Initiative: Analysis of a Formal Mentoring Initiative for Medical Students Interested in Radiation Oncology

The importance of mentorship in medicine and its impact on academic and professional development has been widely studied. However, mentorship for medical students in the field of radiation oncology is limited. Our radiation oncology department developed a formal medical student mentorship program in 2004. This program included both clinical and research mentoring pathways. Our study aims to gain feedback and perspective from former medical student participants who subsequently entered into a radiation oncology residency program. An anonymous survey was sent to 22 former students in the mentorship program from 2005 to 2016 who entered a radiation oncology residency program. The survey included Likert scales (1-5), multiple choice, strength category rankings, and free responses. Data was compiled and analyzed with Qualtrics data software. The survey response rate was 100%. Seventeen (77.3%) participants reported that the mentorship program strongly affected their career choice and a majority reported that their research experience strongly (45.5%) or moderately affected (31.8%) their career choice. Fourteen (63.6%) respondents reported that the mentorship program was very effective and 8 (36.4%) reported it as being effective. Eighteen (81.8%) respondents reported that mentorship was extremely important to their career. Students participating in the research pathway also reported improvement in valuable skills such as presentations, abstract writing, manuscript writing, statistical analysis, and coordination with colleagues. A total of 66.7% of attending radiation oncologists who previously participated in this program now practice in an academic setting. Our institution successfully developed a formalized mentorship program for medical students interested in radiation oncology. Participants in this program reported high levels of satisfaction and emphasized the importance of mentorship in the development of valuable research competencies and on their overall career path. This program can serve as a model for future mentorship initiative in medical school.

A Thorough Analysis of the Current State of Cancer Education in Medical Schools and Application of Experimental Teaching Techniques and Their Efficacy

Newly diagnosed cases of cancer are expected to double by the year 2040. Although many different oncology teaching initiatives have been implemented, many students continue to report uncertainty when dealing with patients with cancer. Through this review, we aim to find the most effective teaching methods to better prepare future physicians. Papers studying different methods of teaching oncology were identified through a thorough review of specific electronic databases. Each study was analyzed and sorted into one of ten unique categories created by the authors specifically for this review. If portions of the study fit into multiple categories, relevant results would be analyzed in all applicable areas. Additionally, papers were separated and analyzed by country of origin, preclinical or clinical interventional basis, and quantitative versus qualitative form of statistical analysis. A total of 115 papers from 26 different countries and regions were included in the final analysis. 91.4% of papers analyzing Lecture and Small Group Discussions indicated a positive impact. 97.1% of papers analyzing Clinical Practice and Simulation indicated a positive impact. 100% of papers analyzing Early Experience and Mentorship, Summer Programs and Voluntary Electives, use of Multidisciplinary Teams, and Role Play stated that these methods had a positive impact. 50% of papers analyzing Computer/Web Based Programs indicated a positive impact. Clinical Practice and Simulation, Role Play, Summer/Elective Programs and interventions involving Multidisciplinary Team Work all appeared to be most effective. Intensive Block Programs, Didactic Lectures/Small Group Discussions, and Computer/Web Based Education tools as a whole were variable. General Review papers showed continued variability in domestic and international oncology curricula. Incorporation of effective teaching interventions should be highly considered in the future creation of standardized oncology curricula in order to best prepare the next generation of physicians. Future studies could explore the differing efficacies of teaching interventions in the postgraduate versus graduate realms.

Mentorship of US Medical Students: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Mentoring of medical students remains a core pillar of medical education, yet the changing landscape of medicine has called for new and innovative mentoring models to guide students in professional development, career placement, and overall student well-being. The objective of this review is to identify and describe models of mentorship for US medical students.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews following PRISMA guidelines. We included original, English-language studies of any research design including descriptive studies that described a mentorship program at a US medical school designed for medical students.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 3743 unique citations. Thirty articles met our inclusion criteria. There was significant diversity of the identified programs with regard to program objectives and size. The traditional dyad model of mentorship was the most frequently cited model, with a combination of models (dyad and group mentorship) cited as the second most common. Outcome measures of the programs were largely survey based, with satisfaction being the most measured outcome. Overall, satisfaction was highly rated throughout all the measured mentoring programs. Seven programs provided objective outcomes measures, including improved residency match data and increased scholarly productivity. The programs with objective outcomes measures were smaller, and 6/7 of them focused on a specific clinical area. Five of these programs relied on the traditional dyad model of mentorship. Cost and faculty time were the most frequently cited barriers to these programs.

DISCUSSION

Our review demonstrates that mentoring programs for medical students can positively improve medical school satisfaction and career development. These results underscore the need for continued innovative mentoring programs to foster optimal student development in the setting of the increasingly competitive residency match process, growing expectations about student research productivity, and the national focus for overall student wellness.

Scholarly Impact of Student Participation in Radiation Oncology Research

PURPOSE

To evaluate the rate of non-doctoral student authors publishing in an academic journal over time and to analyze the effects student authors have on the scholarly impact of corresponding authors (CAs) by comparing their respective H-index (H_i).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A database was created of authors who published articles in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics in 2006, 2010, and 2014 that included CA, degree, and student author designations. Corresponding authors' H_is were obtained from Scopus (scopus.com). Student authorship rates were compared between the sampled years. The data were divided into 2 groups: CAs publishing with student authors (SA) and those without (nSA). The CAs' median and mean H_is with standard deviation and a 95% confidence interval were compared between SA and nSA.

RESULTS

A total of 1728 published articles were identified with 1477 unique CAs. The percentage of published articles with student authors increased from 44.4% in 2006, to 52.9% in 2010, to 55.9% in 2014 (P = .0003). In overall analysis, mean H_i was higher for SA as compared with nSA (24.3 vs 22.9), although this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .094). Mean H_i (standard deviation) in 2006, 2010, and 2014 was 27.9 (16.6), 23.6 (16.7), and 18.5 (14.6), respectively. Mean H_i was significantly higher for SA compared with nSA in the years 2006 (29.5 vs 26.6, P = .048) and 2010 (24.9 vs 21.9, P = .038) but not in 2014 (18.5 vs 18.4, P = .963).

CONCLUSION

Student authorship rates in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics are increasing. The data suggest that student participation in research may benefit both corresponding and student authors. Creating and expanding research programs to integrate research into medical education may enhance students' experience and encourage interest in radiation oncology.

Radiation Oncology Teaching Programmes as Part of the Undergraduate Degree in Medicine in Spanish Universities: the Need for an Update of the Contents and Structure

The relevance of radiation oncology (RO) teaching in the Faculty of Medicine Degree Plan is justified by the high number of cancer patients who will require it at some point in their evolution of radiotherapy (RT). About 40 % of the population who will suffer cancer will be cured by RT alone or other related treatment modalities. Therefore, cancer education and RT teaching needs to have an in depth impact in the undergraduate medicine programmes. This education component is highly variable, not only among countries but also within each country, in terms of content (theory and practical training), number of credits and departmental affiliation of the teachers. Our aim is to take a snapshot of the situation of the teaching of RO in undergraduate university education in Spain. We have analysed 40 Spanish universities about specific aspects related to the teaching of RT. Information was obtained by mail or telephone contact throughout 2015. We have analysed the elements involved in teaching performance. In universities with various instructional units, we have taken the average of them. Among the Universities consulted in Spain, during the period of the medical degree, the average time allocated to RT lectures is 12 h (range, 0-36), the mean time allocated to seminars is 4 h (range, 0-22), and the mean time assigned to practices is 11 h (range, 0-38). The subject is mainly taught by a radiation oncologist and 80 % of Spanish universities have at least one radiation oncologist on staff. Undergraduate radiation oncology teaching in Spain shows structural heterogeneity. The Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) University Forum has identified new opportunities and elaborated a proposal to improve undergraduate education in oncology.

Cultivating Interest in Oncology Through a Medical Student Oncology Society

The purpose of this descriptive analysis is to describe a formal method to foster interest in oncology among medical students through a Student Oncology Society (SOS). The SOS is a student-run multidisciplinary interest group that offers oncology-related events to interested medical students at the Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM). We employed a student survey to document the impact of the SOS on student interest in careers in oncology and students' perceived accessibility of mentors in oncology at our institution. All 35 students who attended the event reported that they found the discussion panels "valuable" or "somewhat valuable." A minority of students reported that student and faculty were "somewhat accessible" or "very accessible." At the end of the survey, 37 % of the students reported that a discussion of career paths of various physicians or a student/resident panel on oncology would be beneficial. By giving students an opportunity to learn about the different medical and surgical specialties within oncology, the SOS is able to cultivate early interest and understanding of the field of oncology among pre-clinical medical students. Further work must be done to connect medical students to faculty mentors in oncology. Although this short report provides a model for other medical schools to begin their own student oncology interest groups, further rigorous evaluation of pre-clinical oncology education initiatives are necessary in order to document their long-term impact on medical education.

A Strategic Approach to Implementation of Medical Mentorship Programs

BACKGROUND

Mentors influence medical trainees' experiences through career enhancement and psychosocial support, yet some trainees never receive benefits from involved mentors.

OBJECTIVE

Our goals were to examine the effectiveness of 2 interventions aimed at increasing the number of mentors in training programs, and to assess group differences in mentor effectiveness, the relationship between trainees' satisfaction with their programs given the presence of mentors, and the relationship between the number of trainees with mentors and postgraduate year (PGY).

METHODS

In group 1, a physician adviser funded by the graduate medical education department implemented mentorships in 6 residency programs, while group 2 involved a training program with funded physician mentoring time. The remaining 89 training programs served as controls. Chi-square tests were used to determine differences.

RESULTS

Survey responses from group 1, group 2, and controls were 47 of 84 (56%), 34 of 78 (44%), and 471 of 981 (48%, P = .38), respectively. The percentages of trainees reporting a mentor in group 1, group 2, and the control group were 89%, 97%, and 79%, respectively (P = .01). There were no differences in mentor effectiveness between groups. Mentored trainees were more likely to be satisfied with their programs (P = .01) and to report that faculty supported their professional aspirations (P = .001). Across all programs, fewer first-year trainees (59%) identified a mentor compared to PGY-2 through PGY-8 trainees (84%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A supported mentorship program is an effective way to create an educational environment that maximizes trainees' perceptions of mentorship and satisfaction with their training programs.