Dataset Information

Enhancing the Careers of Under-Represented Junior Faculty in Biomedical Research: The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID).

ABSTRACT: The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID) in Health-Related Research is a career advancement opportunity sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Three mentored programs address difficulties experienced by junior investigators in establishing independent research careers and academic advancement. Aims are to increase the number of faculty from under-represented minority groups who successfully compete for external research funding. Data were collected using a centralized data-entry system from three Summer Institutes. Outcomes include mentees' satisfaction rating about the program, grant and publications productivity and specific comments. Fifty-eight junior faculty mentees (38% male) noticeably improved their rates of preparing/submitting grant applications and publications, with a 18-23% increase in confidence levels in planning and conducting research. According to survey comments, the training received in grantsmanship skills and one-on-one mentoring were the most valuable program components. The SIPID mentoring program was highly valued by the junior faculty mentees. The program will continue in 2011-2014 as PRIDE (PRogram to Increase Diversity among individuals Engaged in health-related research). Long-term follow-up of current mentees will be indexed at five years post training (2013). In summary, these mentoring programs hope to continue increasing the diversity of the next generation of scientists in biomedical research.

SUBMITTER: Rice TK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4324679 | biostudies-literature | Summer 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Enhancing the Careers of Under-Represented Junior Faculty in Biomedical Research: The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID).

Rice Treva K TK Liu Li L Jeffe Donna B DB Jobe Jared B JB Boutjdir Mohamed M Pace Betty S BS Rao Dabeeru C DC

Journal of the National Medical Association 20140101 1

The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID) in Health-Related Research is a career advancement opportunity sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Three mentored programs address difficulties experienced by junior investigators in establishing independent research careers and academic advancement. Aims are to increase the number of faculty from under-represented minority groups who successfully compete for external research funding. Data were collected using a ...[more]

PMID: 25684827

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn the highly competitive environment of academic medicine, junior faculty investigators face high attrition rates due to challenges in finding effective mentorship, securing grant funding, and obtaining resources to support their career development and research productivity. The purpose of this study was to describe the centralized, cost-sharing design of the Independent Investigator Incubator (I3) program as a novel approach to junior faculty mentoring and to evaluate quantitative outcomes for program improvement.MethodsIn September 2014, the I3 pilot program, a comprehensive mentorship program targeting junior faculty pursuing research careers, was launched. Participants included junior faculty during the crucial first three years of their research careers or during their transition from career development awards to more independent research. Following initial screening, the I3 mentees were paired with a senior faculty "super-mentor" with expertise in either basic science or clinical research. Mentees were provided with robust traditional one-on-one mentoring, targeted feedback from a super-mentor review committee, as well as biostatistician and grant writing support. To assess the effectiveness of the I3 program, we tracked outcome measures via baseline and 12-month mentee surveys. Data collected assessed program diversity, mentee self-assessments, evaluation of the mentoring relationship, scholarship and productivity metrics. Raw data were analyzed using a paired t-test in Excel (P < 0.05).ResultsResults of the baseline mentee self-assessment survey found that the I3 mentees indicated common "perceive deficits" including navigating the organizational and institutional culture, clear direction in achieving promotion and tenure, among others. When baseline mentee survey responses were compared to 12-month responses, we identified strong "perceived growth" in categories, such as Research and Interpersonal Skills and Career Development Skills. Further, productivity metrics at 12-months revealed that roughly 80% of I3 mentees successfully published a manuscript(s). The I3 program has helped generate roughly $12.1 million dollars in investigator-initiated funding after two years in the program.ConclusionThe I3 program allows for shared costs between institutions and increased availability of successful subject matter experts. Study results imply that the I3 mentoring program provides transformative mentorship for junior faculty. Using our findings, we developed courses and an annual "snapshot" of mentee performance for mentors.

Project description:PurposeAlthough mentorship has been associated with promotion, job satisfaction, and retention, data are limited on the mentorship experience of clinical- versus research-track physicians as well as feasibility and relative priority of formal program components.Methods and materialsWithin a single-institution, multi-site, academic network, we implemented a Radiation Oncology AcaDemic Mentorship Program (ROADMAP) for junior faculty. Validated surveys assessing mentee satisfaction were distributed at baseline and 1 year. The statistical analysis included Wilcoxon rank sum and signed tests. Mentees assessed the likelihood to recommend each program component (10-point Likert-type scale), and means with standard error (SE) are reported.ResultsAmong 42 eligible junior faculty, 36 (86%) opted into the program. The median time since residency was 2.5 years (interquartile range, 1.75-5.25) on the clinical track (n = 12) and 3 years (interquartile range, 2.75-5.00) on the research track (n = 24). At baseline, research-track physicians reported higher satisfaction with mentoring than physicians on the clinical track (2.92 vs 2.16; P = .02). Among 32 physicians completing 1 year, overall satisfaction with mentoring increased compared with baseline (2.72 vs 3.87; P < .001), which persisted on subset analysis for both clinical- (2.16 vs 4.03; P < .001) and research-track physicians (2.99 vs 3.77; P = .005). At 1 year, 28 mentees (88%) opted to continue the program. Program components were rated 8.25 (SE, 0.37) for mentor-mentee pairings, 7.22 (SE, 0.39) for goal setting, 6.84 (SE, 0.47) for administrative support, 6.69 (SE, 0.44) for peer mentoring, and 6.53 (SE, 0.45) for steering committee oversight. Ratings of peer mentoring were not associated with track (P = .59) or years in practice (P = .29).ConclusionsClinical-track physicians may be less satisfied with mentorship than research-track faculty. However, all junior faculty, regardless of track, appeared to benefit from formalizing dyadic mentor-mentee relationships, goal setting, and peer mentoring. Further work is needed to determine the role of mentorship in addressing physician burnout.

Dataset Information

Enhancing the Careers of Under-Represented Junior Faculty in Biomedical Research: The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID).

Publications

Enhancing the Careers of Under-Represented Junior Faculty in Biomedical Research: The Summer Institute Program to Increase Diversity (SIPID).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets