Building capacity and equity in implementation science: evaluation of a national mentored training program.

BACKGROUND

As implementation science evolves, it is essential to expand training capacity to build intellectual capital continually. The demand for training in implementation science far outstrips the current supply. This paper presents the methods and findings from the Institute for Implementation Science Scholars (IS-2) national training program (2020-2024).

METHODS

The IS-2 was a US-based, two-year training program that provided mentored training for early- and mid-career researchers interested in applying implementation science principles to reduce the burden of chronic disease disparities. Scholars attended two annual, 2.5-day intensive training sessions, received ongoing remote and in-person mentoring, and were supported by other activities (e.g., pilot funding, networking events, mock grant reviews). A quasi-experimental (pre/post) design evaluated IS-2 on skill building, mentoring, and networking. We used descriptive and inferential statistics to characterize the sample and analyzed primary outcomes and networks.

RESULTS

A majority of the 59 scholars were female (86%), white (61%), and assistant professors (61%). Forty-three implementation science competencies were assessed; all skill categories increased from baseline to 10 months and from 10 to 22 months post-enrollment. The relative change was largest for advanced competencies. Scholars rated their assigned mentors as highly competent across all mentoring competencies. A vibrant mentoring network was established, with the highest number of network ties in 2023, facilitating manuscript publication and joint research. Under-represented scholars (n = 21) had similar skill gains relative to scholars not-under represented, yet were less likely to hold network ties in 2024. After accounting for other predictors, sharing a mentoring relationship within the previous two years was a strong positive predictor of forming collaboration ties between network members in 2024 (odds ratio = 9.66; 95% confidence interval = 6.34-14.74). IS-2 showed multiple impacts of practice and societal relevance (e.g., improving intervention reach, building cost data in patient decision aids).

CONCLUSIONS

The approaches used in IS-2 effectively helped mentees gain skills in implementation science, experience mentorship for career development, and establish collaborative networks. The results demonstrate how the field can develop and utilize a mentoring program to reach diverse scholars, incorporate equity into curricula, and conduct high-quality mentoring to address critical implementation science topics.