Mentoring interventions for underrepresented scholars in biomedical and behavioral sciences

Effects on quality of mentoring interactions and discussions

Vivian Lewis, Camille A. Martina, Michael P. McDermott, Linda Chaudron, Paula M. Trief, Jennifer G. LaGuardia, Daryl Sharp, Steven Goodman, Gene D. Morse, Richard M. Ryan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Mentors rarely receive education about the unique needs of underrepresented scholars in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. We hypothesized that mentor-training and peer-mentoring interventions for these scholars would enrich the perceived quality and breadth of discussions between mentor-protégé dyads (i.e., mentor-protégé pairs). Our multicenter, randomized study of 150 underrepresented scholar-mentor dyads compared: 1) mentor training, 2) protégé peer mentoring, 3) combined mentor training and peer mentoring, and 4) a control condition (i.e., usual practice of mentoring). In this secondary analysis, the outcome variables were quality of dyad time and breadth of their discussions. Protégé participants were graduate students, fellows, and junior faculty in behavioral and biomedical research and healthcare. Dyads with mentor training were more likely than those without mentor training to have discussed teaching and work-life balance. Dyads with peer mentoring were more likely than those without peer mentoring to have discussed clinical care and career plans. The combined intervention dyads were more likely than controls to perceive that the quality of their time together was good/excellent. Our study supports the value of these mentoring interventions to enhance the breadth of dyad discussions and quality of time together, both important components of a good mentoring relationship.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberar44
JournalCBE Life Sciences Education
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2017

Fingerprint

Behavioral Sciences
Mentors
behavioral science
mentoring
dyad
interaction
Teaching
Education
Students
work-life-balance
Behavioral Research
Mentoring
secondary analysis
Multicenter Studies
Biomedical Research
graduate
career
Delivery of Health Care

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

Cite this

Mentoring interventions for underrepresented scholars in biomedical and behavioral sciences : Effects on quality of mentoring interactions and discussions. / Lewis, Vivian; Martina, Camille A.; McDermott, Michael P.; Chaudron, Linda; Trief, Paula M.; LaGuardia, Jennifer G.; Sharp, Daryl; Goodman, Steven; Morse, Gene D.; Ryan, Richard M.

In: CBE Life Sciences Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, ar44, 01.09.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lewis, Vivian ; Martina, Camille A. ; McDermott, Michael P. ; Chaudron, Linda ; Trief, Paula M. ; LaGuardia, Jennifer G. ; Sharp, Daryl ; Goodman, Steven ; Morse, Gene D. ; Ryan, Richard M. / Mentoring interventions for underrepresented scholars in biomedical and behavioral sciences : Effects on quality of mentoring interactions and discussions. In: CBE Life Sciences Education. 2017 ; Vol. 16, No. 3.
@article{fa9a077293bb40ef9769427bceb5d3e3,
title = "Mentoring interventions for underrepresented scholars in biomedical and behavioral sciences: Effects on quality of mentoring interactions and discussions",
abstract = "Mentors rarely receive education about the unique needs of underrepresented scholars in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. We hypothesized that mentor-training and peer-mentoring interventions for these scholars would enrich the perceived quality and breadth of discussions between mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} dyads (i.e., mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} pairs). Our multicenter, randomized study of 150 underrepresented scholar-mentor dyads compared: 1) mentor training, 2) prot{\'e}g{\'e} peer mentoring, 3) combined mentor training and peer mentoring, and 4) a control condition (i.e., usual practice of mentoring). In this secondary analysis, the outcome variables were quality of dyad time and breadth of their discussions. Prot{\'e}g{\'e} participants were graduate students, fellows, and junior faculty in behavioral and biomedical research and healthcare. Dyads with mentor training were more likely than those without mentor training to have discussed teaching and work-life balance. Dyads with peer mentoring were more likely than those without peer mentoring to have discussed clinical care and career plans. The combined intervention dyads were more likely than controls to perceive that the quality of their time together was good/excellent. Our study supports the value of these mentoring interventions to enhance the breadth of dyad discussions and quality of time together, both important components of a good mentoring relationship.",
author = "Vivian Lewis and Martina, {Camille A.} and McDermott, {Michael P.} and Linda Chaudron and Trief, {Paula M.} and LaGuardia, {Jennifer G.} and Daryl Sharp and Steven Goodman and Morse, {Gene D.} and Ryan, {Richard M.}",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1187/cbe.16-07-0215",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
journal = "CBE Life Sciences Education",
issn = "1931-7913",
publisher = "American Society for Cell Biology",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mentoring interventions for underrepresented scholars in biomedical and behavioral sciences

T2 - Effects on quality of mentoring interactions and discussions

AU - Lewis, Vivian

AU - Martina, Camille A.

AU - McDermott, Michael P.

AU - Chaudron, Linda

AU - Trief, Paula M.

AU - LaGuardia, Jennifer G.

AU - Sharp, Daryl

AU - Goodman, Steven

AU - Morse, Gene D.

AU - Ryan, Richard M.

PY - 2017/9/1

Y1 - 2017/9/1

N2 - Mentors rarely receive education about the unique needs of underrepresented scholars in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. We hypothesized that mentor-training and peer-mentoring interventions for these scholars would enrich the perceived quality and breadth of discussions between mentor-protégé dyads (i.e., mentor-protégé pairs). Our multicenter, randomized study of 150 underrepresented scholar-mentor dyads compared: 1) mentor training, 2) protégé peer mentoring, 3) combined mentor training and peer mentoring, and 4) a control condition (i.e., usual practice of mentoring). In this secondary analysis, the outcome variables were quality of dyad time and breadth of their discussions. Protégé participants were graduate students, fellows, and junior faculty in behavioral and biomedical research and healthcare. Dyads with mentor training were more likely than those without mentor training to have discussed teaching and work-life balance. Dyads with peer mentoring were more likely than those without peer mentoring to have discussed clinical care and career plans. The combined intervention dyads were more likely than controls to perceive that the quality of their time together was good/excellent. Our study supports the value of these mentoring interventions to enhance the breadth of dyad discussions and quality of time together, both important components of a good mentoring relationship.

AB - Mentors rarely receive education about the unique needs of underrepresented scholars in the biomedical and behavioral sciences. We hypothesized that mentor-training and peer-mentoring interventions for these scholars would enrich the perceived quality and breadth of discussions between mentor-protégé dyads (i.e., mentor-protégé pairs). Our multicenter, randomized study of 150 underrepresented scholar-mentor dyads compared: 1) mentor training, 2) protégé peer mentoring, 3) combined mentor training and peer mentoring, and 4) a control condition (i.e., usual practice of mentoring). In this secondary analysis, the outcome variables were quality of dyad time and breadth of their discussions. Protégé participants were graduate students, fellows, and junior faculty in behavioral and biomedical research and healthcare. Dyads with mentor training were more likely than those without mentor training to have discussed teaching and work-life balance. Dyads with peer mentoring were more likely than those without peer mentoring to have discussed clinical care and career plans. The combined intervention dyads were more likely than controls to perceive that the quality of their time together was good/excellent. Our study supports the value of these mentoring interventions to enhance the breadth of dyad discussions and quality of time together, both important components of a good mentoring relationship.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026480730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026480730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1187/cbe.16-07-0215

DO - 10.1187/cbe.16-07-0215

M3 - Article

VL - 16

JO - CBE Life Sciences Education

JF - CBE Life Sciences Education

SN - 1931-7913

IS - 3

M1 - ar44

ER -