Mentoring Experiences and Publication Productivity among Early Career Biomedical Investigators and Trainees

Objective

To identify which mentoring domains influence publication productivity among early career researchers and trainees and whether publication productivity differs between underrepresented minority (URM) and well-represented groups (WRGs). The mentoring aspects that promote publication productivity remain unclear. Advancing health equity requires a diverse workforce, yet URM trainees are less likely to publish and URM investigators are less likely to obtain federal research grants, relative to WRG counterparts.

Methods

A mentoring-focused online follow-up survey was administered to respondents of the NRMN Annual Survey who self-identified as mentees. Publications were identified from a public database and validated with participant CV data. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested the associations of publication productivity with mentoring domains.

Results

URM investigators and trainees had fewer publications (M = 7.3) than their WRG counterparts (M = 13.8). Controlling for career stage and social characteristics, those who worked on funded projects, and received grant-writing or research mentorship, had a higher probability of any publications. Controlling for URM status, gender, and career stage, mentorship on grant-writing and funding was positively associated with publication count (IRR=1.72). Holding career stage, gender, and mentoring experiences constant, WRG investigators and trainees had more publications than their URM counterparts (IRR=1.66).

Conclusions

Grant-writing mentorship is particularly important for publication productivity. Future research should investigate whether grant-writing mentorship differentially impacts URM and WRG investigators and should investigate how and why grant-writing mentorship fosters increased publication productivity.