Do mentoring programmes influence women's careers in the health and medical research sector? A mixed-methods evaluation of Australia's Franklin Women Mentoring Programme

OBJECTIVES

It is known that women are under-represented in senior positions within the health and medical research sector. The Franklin Women Mentoring Programme (Programme) is a professionally facilitated, cross-organisational initiative designed to support career development for mid-career women. The objective of this study was to evaluate Programme outcomes reported by participants 12 months following its formal conclusion.

DESIGN

Explanatory sequential mixed-methods study design using a cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews.

SETTING

Health and medical research institutes in Sydney, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Health and medical researchers from the 2018 Programme.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Changes in knowledge, skills, behaviours and research metrics directly attributed to Programme participation.

RESULTS

A total of 50 mentors and mentees participated in the cross-sectional survey (68% of the total cohort) and 14 mentors and mentees participated in the interviews. All reported changes to their knowledge, skills, behaviours and research metrics which were directly attributed to participation in the Programme. This included changes in knowledge and skills to be more inclusive (96% mentees, 83% mentors), resilience (88% mentees, 67% mentors), ability to have difficult workplace conversations (88% mentees, 71% mentors) and improvements in supervisory and team management (82% mentees, 75% mentors) skills. Positive impacts on promotions and grant opportunities were also reported. All evaluation participants believed this Programme was a worthwhile initiative for their workplaces to invest in.

CONCLUSION

Participation in this cross-organisational, professionally facilitated, structured mentoring programme has led to positive outcomes for mentees, as well as mentors. Reported outcomes indicate the Programme is meeting its aims to support the career development of mid-career women in health and medical research, while facilitating a more inclusive workforce.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Indirect Protection Afforded by Vaccinating Children Against Seasonal Influenza: Implications for Policy

Background

Universal childhood vaccination is a potential solution to reduce seasonal influenza burden.

Methods

We reviewed systematically the literature on "herd"/indirect protection from vaccinating children aged 6 months to 17 years against influenza.

Results

Of 30 studies included, 14 (including 1 cluster randomized controlled trial [cRCT]) used live attenuated influenza vaccine, 11 (7 cRCTs) used inactivated influenza vaccine, and 5 (1 cRCT) compared both vaccine types. Twenty of 30 studies reported statistically significant indirect protection effectiveness (IPE) with point estimates ranging from 4% to 66%. Meta-regression suggests that studies with high quality and/or sufficiently large sample size are more likely to report significant IPE. In meta-analyses of 6 cRCTs with full randomization (rated as moderate quality overall), significant IPE was found in 1 cRCT in closely connected communities where school-aged children were vaccinated: 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41%-72%; I2 = 0%; N = 2326) against laboratory-confirmed influenza, and 3 household cRCTs in which preschool-aged children were vaccinated: 22% (95% CI, 1%-38%; I2 = 0%; N = 1903) against acute respiratory infections or influenza-like illness. Significant IPE was also reported in a large-scale cRCT (N = 8510) that was not fully randomized, and 3 ecological studies (N > 10000) of moderate quality including 36% reduction in influenza-related mortality among the elderly in a Japanese school-based program. Data on IPE in other settings are heterogeneous and lacked power to draw a firm conclusion.

Conclusions

The available evidence suggests that influenza vaccination of children confers indirect protection in some but not all settings. Robust, large-scaled studies are required to better quantify the indirect protection from vaccinating children for different settings/endpoints.

Comparative in silico analysis of two vaccine candidates for group A streptococcus predicts that they both may have similar safety profiles

BACKGROUND

Concerns of immune cross-reactivity, between epitopes of the group A streptococcal (GAS) M-proteins and host proteins have hindered the progress of an effective GAS vaccine. An ideal M-protein based subunit vaccine should not elicit heart tissue cross-reactive antibody responses and should not activate M-protein specific CD4+ T-cells. In the current study we used a bioinformatic and immunoinformatic approach to assess the safety of J8 and J14, chimeric vaccine constructs containing a GAS derived M-protein epitope embedded in flanking GCN4 region. We demonstrate that at the primary amino acid level J8 and J14 show very little homology to human proteins. ProPred, RANKPEP and HLABIND algorithms failed to predict significant binding between the M-protein specific regions of J8 and J14 and class II binding alleles. A single peptide was predicted to bind to HLA class I allele B_2705. This data was supported by cellular proliferation assays demonstrating few peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from donors respond to J8 and J14. Reassuringly, there was no correlation between proliferation to these peptides, and proliferation to host proteins. This data suggests that J8 and J14 are unlikely to induce cross-reactive immune responses, and will be safe for use in humans.