Training mentors of clinical and translational research scholars: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether a structured mentoring curriculum improves research mentoring skills.

Method: The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) at 16 academic health centers (June 2010 to July 2011). Faculty mentors of trainees who were conducting clinical/translational research ≥50% of the time were eligible. The intervention was an eight-hour, case-based curriculum focused on six mentoring competencies. The primary outcome was the change in mentors' self-reported pretest to posttest composite scores on the Mentoring Competency Assessment (MCA). Secondary outcomes included changes in the following: mentors' awareness as measured by their self-reported retrospective change in MCA scores, mentees' ratings of their mentors' competency as measured by MCA scores, and mentoring behaviors as reported by mentors and their mentees.

Results: A total of 283 mentor-mentee pairs were enrolled: 144 mentors were randomized to the intervention; 139 to the control condition. Self-reported pre-/posttest change in MCA composite scores was higher for mentors in the intervention group compared with controls (P < .001). Retrospective changes in MCA composite scores between the two groups were even greater, and extended to all six subscale scores (P < .001). More intervention-group mentors reported changes in their mentoring practices than control mentors (P < .001). Mentees working with intervention-group mentors reported larger changes in retrospective MCA pre-/posttest scores (P = .003) and more changes in their mentors' behavior (P = .002) than those paired with control mentors.

Conclusions: This RCT demonstrates that a competency-based research mentor training program can improve mentors' skills.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01184131.

Figure 1

Flow of both mentor and mentee participants through a multi-institutional randomized controlled trial of a formal mentoring curriculum for mentors of mentees working in clinical and translational research, 2010–2011.

Figure 2

Comparisons by group of mean Mentoring Competency Assessment composite score self-assessed by mentors, with changes shown from pretest (“Pre”) to posttest (“Post”) and from retrospective pretest (“Retro-pre”) to posttest (“Post”). Group means with 95% confidence intervals are shown. P values test for group difference in the indicated change.

Figure 3

Comparisons by group of mean Mentoring Competency Assessment subscale scores self-assessed by mentors, with changes shown from pretest (“Pre”) to posttest (“Post”) and from retrospective pretest (“Retro-pre”) to posttest (“Post”). Subscales shown are communication (3A), expectations (3B), understanding (3C), independence (3D), diversity (3E), and professional development (3F). Group means with 95% confidence intervals are shown. P values test for group difference in the indicated change.

Figure 4

Comparisons by group of mean Mentoring Competency Assessment composite score assessed by mentees, with changes shown from pretest (“Pre”) to posttest (“Post”) and from retrospective pretest (“Retro-pre”) to posttest (“Post”). Group means with 95% confidence intervals are shown. P values test for group difference in the indicated change.

Figure 5

Self-reported stages of change at the six-month postinterview for the intervention and control groups. Given is the percentage of mentors by group who reported the given stage together with 95% Wilson confidence intervals. The difference in proportion of intervention versus control mentors who reported implementing at least one behavioral change is significant (P < .001).