Katerndahl David A, Longo Daniel R, Griswold Kim
Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900, USA.
Fam Med. 2011 Mar;43(3):193-7.
Family medicine lacks a critical mass of experienced, federally funded researchers to serve as research mentors for young investigators. The purpose of this study was to identify issues important when mentoring junior investigators.
Eight experienced primary care investigators, known for their excellence in mentorship, were recruited from the Primary Care Research Methods and Statistics Conference. After participation in a focus group exploring issues related to the quality, techniques, effectiveness, and efficiency of mentorship, subjects completed three rounds of Delphi using variables identified during the focus group to develop a comprehensive, stable list of 72 mentoring strategies.
Five items received perfect ratings of agreement: (1) primary task to help protégé identify long-term goals and strategize to meet them, (2) difference exists between mentoring and collaboration, (3) assigning mentor is not a guarantee that the relationship will work, (4) mentor can provide expertise and encouragement but not ensure a desired outcome, and (5) mentor who does not care about the protégé is not likely to be effective. The strategies with which the mentors disagreed included mentor-protégé characteristics and differences.
Mentors emphasized the importance of long-term goals, difference between mentorship and collaboration, and commitment from the mentor.
家庭医学领域缺乏足够数量的经验丰富且获得联邦资金支持的研究人员，难以担当年轻研究人员的研究导师。本研究旨在确定在指导初级研究人员时重要的问题。
从初级保健研究方法与统计会议中招募了八位以指导工作出色而闻名的经验丰富的初级保健研究人员。在参与了一个探讨指导的质量、技巧、有效性和效率相关问题的焦点小组之后，研究对象使用焦点小组期间确定的变量完成了三轮德尔菲法，以制定一份包含72条指导策略的全面、稳定清单。
有五项内容获得了完全一致的评分：（1）帮助受指导者确定长期目标并制定实现目标的策略是主要任务，（2）指导与合作之间存在差异，（3）指定导师并不能保证这种关系会起作用，（4）导师可以提供专业知识和鼓励，但不能确保达到预期结果，（5）不关心受指导者的导师不太可能有效。导师们存在分歧的策略包括导师与受指导者的特征及差异。
导师们强调了长期目标、指导与合作之间的差异以及导师的投入的重要性。
