Hall Gentzon, Corsino Leonor, Mack Michelle, Hall Rasheeda K, Sloane Richard, Sullivan Beth, Hough Holly, Thomas Kevin, Colón-Emeric Cathleen S
Duke University School of Medicine.
Chron Mentor Coach. 2024 Jun;8(1):169-177. doi: 10.62935/of1528.
The National Academies of Science stresses the importance of research mentoring. We assessed the internal consistency and application of a novel 33 item mentor evaluation survey and explored differences across subgroups. The survey was administered annually to mentees. The response rate was 17.8% for a sample of 710 respondents. The survey exhibited strong internal validity with Cronbach Alpha > 0.89 for each subscale. Overall scores across the three domains were high. Basic Science trainees scored their mentor significantly lower than those in Translational or Clinical Science across domains (0.11-0.25 points). Underrepresented Racial Ethnic Groups (UREG) trainee scores were significantly lower in academic guidance and personal communication. Women had lower scores in 4 out of 5 domains. The survey is a modified instrument to assess mentee experience, although further validation against mentee outcomes is needed.
美国国家科学院强调研究指导的重要性。我们评估了一项新颖的包含33个条目的导师评价调查的内部一致性和应用情况，并探讨了不同亚组之间的差异。该调查每年对学员进行一次。710名受访者样本的回复率为17.8%。该调查在每个子量表上都表现出很强的内部效度，Cronbach Alpha系数大于0.89。三个领域的总体得分都很高。基础科学学员在各个领域给他们导师的评分明显低于转化医学或临床科学领域的学员（低0.11 - 0.25分）。代表性不足的种族/族裔群体（UREG）学员在学术指导和个人交流方面的得分明显较低。女性在5个领域中的4个领域得分较低。该调查是一种经过修改的工具，用于评估学员的经历，不过还需要针对学员的成果进行进一步验证。
