Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Acad Med. 2010 Jun;85(6):1067-72. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181dbc5c7.
To define the characteristics of effective mentor-protégé relationships in a Clinical Research Training Program (CRTP) and to assess the agreement among mentors and protégés regarding those attributes.
The authors administered an anonymous survey to protégés who completed the Albert Einstein College of Medicine's CRTP during its first seven years (2000-2006) and their mentors. Statements included aspects of mentoring thought to be important within the program, such as availability (Statement 1) and oversight of the thesis process (Statements 2-4). Additional statements were related both to career development (e.g., looking out for the best interests of the scholar and assisting in negotiations for a faculty position after program completion [Statements 5 and 6]) and to the expectation that the mentor would continue to be a resource for the protégé in years to come (Statement 7). The authors assessed overall agreement among mentors and protégés, using matched pair analysis.
Overall response was 70.7% (133/188), with fewer matched pairs (n = 50, 50%). Seventy-five percent of respondents agreed strongly or somewhat with all statements. Analysis indicated significant agreement with Statements 2, 4, 6, and 7. Median scores from protégés did not differ whether their mentor responded (paired) or not (unpaired); however, mentor-protégé pairs had significantly greater agreement with Statements 3-7 than unpaired mentors and protégés (P < .01).
Mentors and protégés seemed to agree that mentors within a CRTP demonstrated effective mentor attributes, including fostering a long-term relationship with the protégé.
定义临床研究培训计划(CRTP)中有效导师-学员关系的特征,并评估导师和学员对这些属性的认同程度。
作者对在艾伯特·爱因斯坦医学院 CRTP 完成的第一至七年(2000-2006 年)的学员及其导师进行了匿名调查。调查内容包括导师认为在项目中很重要的指导方面,如可用性(第 1 条)和论文过程的监督(第 2-4 条)。此外,还有一些陈述与职业发展有关(例如,关注学者的最佳利益并协助完成项目后教职职位的谈判[第 5 和 6 条]),以及期望导师在未来几年内继续成为学员的资源(第 7 条)。作者使用配对分析评估了导师和学员之间的总体一致性。
总体回应率为 70.7%(133/188),配对的匹配对(n = 50,50%)较少。75%的受访者强烈或有些同意所有陈述。分析表明,第 2、4、6 和 7 条的一致性显著。无论导师是否回应(配对),学员的中位数评分都没有差异;但是,导师-学员配对比未配对的导师和学员对第 3-7 条的一致性要高(P <.01)。
导师和学员似乎都认为 CRTP 中的导师表现出了有效的导师属性,包括与学员建立长期关系。