0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development and validation of the Medical Student Scholar-Ideal Mentor Scale (MSS-IMS)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Programs encouraging medical student research such as Scholarly Concentrations (SC) are increasing nationally. However, there are few validated measures of mentoring quality tailored to medical students. We sought to modify and validate a mentoring scale for use in medical student research experiences.

          Methods

          SC faculty created a scale evaluating how medical students assess mentors in the research setting. A validated graduate student scale of mentorship, the Ideal Mentor Scale, was modified by selecting 10 of the 34 original items most relevant for medical students and adding an item on project ownership. We administered this 11-item assessment to second year medical students in the Johns Hopkins University SC Program from 2011 to 2016, and performed exploratory factor analysis with oblique rotation to determine included items and subscales. We correlate overall mentoring quality scale and subscales with four student outcomes: ‘very satisfied’ with mentor, ‘more likely’ to do future research, project accepted at a national meeting, and highest SC faculty rating of student project.

          Results

          Five hundred ninety-eight students responded (87% response rate). After factor analysis, we eliminated three items producing a final scale of overall mentoring quality (8 items, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92) with three subscales: advocacy, responsiveness, and assistance. The overall mentoring quality scale was significantly associated with all four student outcomes, including mentor satisfaction: OR [(95% CI), p-value] 1.66 [(1.53–1.79), p < 0.001]; likelihood of future research: OR 1.06 [(1.03–1.09), p < 0.001]; abstract submission to national meetings: OR 1.05 [(1.02–1.08), p = 0.002]; and SC faculty rating of student projects: OR 1.08 [(1.03–1.14), p = 0.004]. Each subscale also correlated with overall mentor satisfaction, and the strongest relationship of each subscale was seen with ‘mentor advocacy.’

          Conclusions

          Mentor quality can be reliably measured and associates with important medical student scholarly outcomes. Given the lack of tools, this scale can be used by other SC Programs to advance medical students’ scholarship.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0969-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Psychometric Theory.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Engaging students in dedicated research and scholarship during medical school: the long-term experiences at Duke and Stanford.

            For more than 40 years, the faculties of Duke University School of Medicine (SOM) and Stanford University SOM have encouraged or required students to engage in scholarship as a way to broaden their education and attract them to careers in academic medicine. A dedicated period of research was first integrated into the Duke curriculum in 1959 to provide an opportunity for students to develop into physician leaders through a rigorous scholarly experience in biomedically related research. Originally designed to foster experience in laboratory-based basic research, the third-year program has evolved in response to the changing landscape of medicine and shifting needs and career interests of the medical student population. Stanford University SOM also has a long-standing commitment to biomedical research and currently requires each student to complete an in-depth, mentored "scholarly concentration." In contrast to Duke, where most of the scholarly research experiences take place in an immersive third year, the Stanford program encourages a longitudinal, multiyear exposure over all four (or five) years of medical school. Although the enduring effects of embedding a rigorous research program are not yet fully known, preliminary data suggest that these experiences instill an appreciation for research, impart research rigor and methodologies, and may motivate students to pursue careers in academic medicine. The authors discuss the histories, evolution, logistics, and ongoing challenges of the research programs at Duke University SOM and Stanford University SOM.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Informal mentoring between faculty and medical students.

              Mentoring skills are valuable assets for academic medicine faculty, who help shape the professionalism of the next generation of physicians. Mentors are role models who also act as guides for students' personal and professional development over time. Mentors can be instrumental in conveying explicit academic knowledge required to master curriculum content. Importantly, they can enhance implicit knowledge about the "hidden curriculum" of professionalism, ethics, values and the art of medicine not learned from texts. In many cases, mentors also provide emotional support and encouragement. The relationship benefits mentors as well, through greater productivity, career satisfaction, and personal gratification. Maximizing the satisfaction and productivity of such relationships entails self-awareness, focus, mutual respect, and explicit communication about the relationship. In this article, the authors describe the development of optimal mentoring relationships, emphasizing the importance of experience and flexibility in working with beginning to advanced students of different learning styles, genders, and races. Concrete advice for mentor "do's and don'ts"is offered, with case examples illustrating key concepts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                410-550-2820 , ssozio@jhmi.edu
                Journal
                BMC Med Educ
                BMC Med Educ
                BMC Medical Education
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6920
                8 August 2017
                8 August 2017
                2017
                : 17
                : 132
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, , Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, ; 301 Mason Lord Dr, Suite 2500, Baltimore, 21224 MD USA
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, , Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, ; Baltimore, MD USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, , Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, ; Baltimore, MD USA
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, , Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, ; Baltimore, MD USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, Berman Institute of Bioethics, , Johns Hopkins University, ; Baltimore, MD USA
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 9311, GRID grid.21107.35, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, , Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, ; Baltimore, MD USA
                Article
                969
                10.1186/s12909-017-0969-1
                5549328
                28789660
                5ee8f999-40fd-46fb-9e3c-b504456bbffa
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 22 March 2017
                : 27 July 2017
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Education
                mentorship,medical students,scholarship
                Education
                mentorship, medical students, scholarship

                Comments

                Comment on this article