Mentoring Resident Scholarly Activity: A Toolkit and Guide for Program Directors, Research Directors and Faculty Mentors

MedEdPORTAL ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Fenton ◽  
Jiyeon Kim ◽  
Erika Abramson ◽  
Linda Waggoner-Fountain ◽  
Monique Naifeh ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. e27-e28
Author(s):  
Erika L. Abramson ◽  
Michelle Stevenson ◽  
Monique Naifeh ◽  
Hoda Hammad ◽  
Linda Gerber ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 1337-1344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian C. Geyer ◽  
Amy H. Kaji ◽  
Eric D. Katz ◽  
Alan E. Jones ◽  
Vikhyat S. Bebarta

2019 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. 259-262
Author(s):  
Alexander Kirkpatrick ◽  
Tom Doran ◽  
David Mullins ◽  
David Gnugnoli ◽  
John Ashurst

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. e23-e24
Author(s):  
Erika L. Abramson ◽  
Michelle D. Stevenson ◽  
Monique Naifeh ◽  
Elizabeth Mauer ◽  
Linda Gerber ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 511-512
Author(s):  
Marna Rayl Greenberg ◽  
Vicken Y. Totten ◽  
Michael D. Repplinger ◽  
Michael D. Menchine

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 998-1006
Author(s):  
Erika L. Abramson ◽  
Monique M. Naifeh ◽  
Michelle D. Stevenson ◽  
Elizabeth Mauer ◽  
Linda M. Gerber ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Viviane G. Nasr ◽  
Iqbal Ahmed ◽  
Iwona Bonney ◽  
Roman Schumann

Background. Effective 2007, the ACGME required scholarly activity during residency. Although many programs have ongoing research, residents' involvement may be limited. This US anesthesiology residency survey assesses the current scholarly environment, research activity and program support during training. Methods. Following IRB approval, 131 US anesthesiology program directors were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Questions to directors and residents included program structure, research activity, funding and productivity. We categorized residencies threefold based on their size. Results are summarized descriptively. Results. The response rate was 31.3% (n=41) for program directors and 15.3% (n=185) for residents. Residents' responses mirrored those of program directors' regarding the presence of didactic curricula (51% versus 51.9%), research rotations (57% versus 56.2%) and a project requirement (37% versus 40%). Demands of residency (27.0%) and early stage in training (22.2%) were the main obstacles to research cited by trainees. Residents' financial support was available in 94.3% of programs. Medium and large programs had multiple funding sources (NIH, industrial and private). Conclusion. Programs are dedicated to incorporate research into their curriculum. Residents' financial support and mentorship are available, while research time is limited. Systematic improvements are needed to increase trainee research in US anesthesiology residencies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. e74-e78
Author(s):  
David Cui ◽  
Nicholas L. Behunin ◽  
Ingrid U. Scott ◽  
Heidi Luise Wingert

Abstract Objective The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of post-interview communication (PIC) during the ophthalmology residency match process and its impact on program directors' (PD's) ranking of applicants. Design Prospective cross-sectional survey. Methods An anonymous, online survey was emailed to the PD of each ophthalmology residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Results Fifty-four percent (63/116) of PDs completed the survey. Eighty-five percent (54/63) of PDs received PIC from applicants or applicants' faculty mentors during the 2018 to 2019 application cycle; 62% (39/63) received PIC regarding >25% of applicants interviewed. Although 41% (26/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor known to the PD, only 3% (2/63) believed that applicants who did not have a faculty mentor conduct PIC on their behalf were disadvantaged. Fourteen percent (9/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor unknown to the PD, and 3% (2/63) reported they would likely rank an applicant higher as a result of PIC from the applicant. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of PIC during the ophthalmology residency match process. The potential impact of PIC on PDs' ranking of applicants varies according to whether the PIC is from a faculty member known to the PD, a faculty member unknown to the PD, or the applicant. This may disadvantage applicants without faculty mentors known to PDs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document