Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Clin Transl Sci. 2010 Dec;3(6):299-304. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2010.00237.x.
There is limited information on how academic institutions support effective mentoring practices for new investigators. A national semistructured telephone interview was conducted to assess current “state of the art” mentoring practices for KL2 scholars among the 46 institutions participating in the Clinical Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium. Mentoring practices examined included: mentor selection, articulating and aligning expectations, assessing the mentoring relationship, and mentor training. Telephone interviews were conducted in winter/fall 2009, with 100% of the CTSAs funded (n=46) through 2009, participating in the survey. Primary findings include: fi ve programs selected mentors for K scholars, 14 programs used mentor contracts to define expectations, 16 programs reported formal mentor evaluation, 10 offered financial incentives to mentors, and 13 offered formal mentoring training. The interviews found considerable variation in mentoring practices for training new investigators among the 46 CTSAs. There was also limited consensus on“what works” and what are the core elements of “effective mentoring practices. Empirical research is needed to help research leaders decide on where and how to place resources related to mentoring
关于学术机构如何支持新研究员的有效指导实践，信息有限。对参与临床转化科学奖（CTSA）联盟的 46 家机构中的 KL2 学者进行了全国性的半结构式电话访谈，以评估当前的“艺术现状”指导实践。检查的指导实践包括：导师选择、明确和调整期望、评估指导关系以及导师培训。电话访谈于 2009 年冬季/秋季进行，通过 2009 年资助的所有 CTSA（n=46）都参与了调查。主要发现包括： fi ve 个项目为 K 学者选择了导师，14 个项目使用导师合同来定义期望，16 个项目报告了正式的导师评估，10 个项目为导师提供了经济奖励，13 个项目提供了正式的指导培训。在 46 个 CTSA 中，新研究员培训方面的指导实践存在很大差异。对于“什么有效”以及“有效指导实践的核心要素”也没有达成共识。需要进行实证研究，帮助研究领导者决定在哪里以及如何投入与指导相关的资源。
