For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
2
views
23
references
 Top references
cited by
4
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      134
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mentoring as an opportunity to improve research and cancer care in Latin America (AAZPIRE project)

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Effective networking and mentoring are critical determinants of professional satisfaction and success in oncology. There are multiple benefits associated with established mentoring programs. However, these are scarce in Latin America (LATAM). The AAZPIRE project meeting was held to encourage the discussion of mentorship strategies in our region, to create new learning frameworks, and improve cancer care. A group of 30 young oncologists and investigators, together with seven members of LACOG and CLICaP experts of 8 LATAM countries, were reunited to share views and define opportunities, barriers, and possible solutions to implement mentorship programs in LATAM. For each of the mentioned topics, key points were obtained by consensus, and a literature review was conducted to support group conclusions. This article analyses mentoring in LATAM countries and its role on promoting leadership. It will address conceptual frameworks, limitations, and opportunities from the perspectives of both mentor and mentee. The creation of regional and international group stimulation programs and joint projects that impact health policies are attractive, starting points to implement mentorship scenarios.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

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

          Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review.

          Dario Sambunjak, Sharon E Straus, Ana Marušić (2006)
          Mentoring, as a partnership in personal and professional growth and development, is central to academic medicine, but it is challenged by increased clinical, administrative, research, and other educational demands on medical faculty. Therefore, evidence for the value of mentoring needs to be evaluated. To systematically review the evidence about the prevalence of mentorship and its relationship to career development. MEDLINE, Current Contents, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases from the earliest available date to May 2006. We identified all studies evaluating the effect of mentoring on career choices and academic advancement among medical students and physicians. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the study population and availability of extractable data. No restrictions were placed on study methods or language. The literature search identified 3640 citations. Review of abstracts led to retrieval of 142 full-text articles for assessment; 42 articles describing 39 studies were selected for review. Of these, 34 (87%) were cross-sectional self-report surveys with small sample size and response rates ranging from 5% to 99%. One case-control study nested in a survey used a comparison group that had not received mentoring, and 1 cohort study had a small sample size and a large loss to follow-up. Less than 50% of medical students and in some fields less than 20% of faculty members had a mentor. Women perceived that they had more difficulty finding mentors than their colleagues who are men. Mentorship was reported to have an important influence on personal development, career guidance, career choice, and research productivity, including publication and grant success. Mentoring is perceived as an important part of academic medicine, but the evidence to support this perception is not strong. Practical recommendations on mentoring in medicine that are evidence-based will require studies using more rigorous methods, addressing contextual issues, and using cross-disciplinary approaches.
          Article 0 comments Cited 155 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The reality of scientific research in Latin America; an insider’s perspective

            Daniel Ciocca, Gabriela Delgado (2017)
            There is tremendous disparity in scientific productivity among nations, particularly in Latin America. At first sight, this could be linked to the relative economic health of the different countries of the region, but even large and relatively rich Latin American countries do not produce a good level of science. Although Latin America has increased the number of its scientists and research institutions in recent years, the gap between developed countries and Latin American countries is startling. The prime importance of science and technology to the development of a nation remains unacknowledged. The major factors contributing to low scientific productivity are the limited access to grant opportunities, inadequate budgets, substandard levels of laboratory infrastructure and equipment, the high cost and limited supply of reagents, and inadequate salaries and personal insecurity of scientists. The political and economic instability in several Latin America countries results in a lack of long-term goals that are essential to the development of science. In Latin America, science is not an engine of the economy. Most equipment and supplies are imported, and national industries are not given the incentives to produce these goods at home. It is a pity that Latin American society has become accustomed to expect new science and technological developments to come from developed countries rather than from their own scientists. In this article, we present a critical view of the Latin American investigator's daily life, particularly in the area of biomedicine. Too many bright young minds continue to leave Latin America for developed countries, where they are very successful. However, we still have many enthusiastic young graduates who want to make a career in science and contribute to society. Governments need to improve the status of science for the sake of these young graduates who represent the intellectual and economic future of their countries.
            Article 0 comments Cited 59 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mentoring programs for physicians in academic medicine: a systematic review.

              T Kashiwagi, Bruce Cook, Prathibha Varkey (2013)
              Mentoring is vital to professional development in the field of medicine, influencing career choice and faculty retention; thus, the authors reviewed mentoring programs for physicians and aimed to identify key components that contribute to these programs' success. The authors searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for articles from January 2000 through May 2011 that described mentoring programs for practicing physicians. The authors reviewed 16 articles, describing 18 programs, extracting program objectives, components, and outcomes. They synthesized findings to determine key elements of successful programs. All of the programs described in the articles focused on academic physicians. The authors identified seven mentoring models: dyad, peer, facilitated peer, speed, functional, group, and distance. The dyad model was most common. The authors identified seven potential components of a formal mentoring program: mentor preparation, planning committees, mentor-mentee contracts, mentor-mentee pairing, mentoring activities, formal curricula, and program funding. Of these, the formation of mentor-mentee pairs received the most attention in published reports. Mentees favored choosing their own mentors; mentors and mentees alike valued protected time. One barrier to program development was limited resources. Written agreements were important to set limits and encourage accountability to the mentoring relationship. Program evaluation was primarily subjective, using locally developed surveys. No programs reported long-term results. The authors identified key program elements that could contribute to successful physician mentoring. Future research might further clarify the use of these elements and employ standardized evaluation methods to determine the long-term effects of mentoring.
              Article 0 comments Cited 56 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): ESMO Open
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): ESMO Open
                Journal ID (hwp): esmoopen
                Journal ID (publisher-id): esmoopen
                Title: ESMO Open
                Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2059-7029
                Publication date Collection: 2020
                Publication date (Electronic): 24 November 2020
                Volume: 5
                Issue: 6
                Electronic Location Identifier: e000988
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentGenitourinary Oncology Unit , Instituto Alexander Fleming Instituto Privado de Oncología , Buenos Aires, Argentina
                [2 ]departmentOncology , Universidade de São Paulo Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo Octavio Frias de Oliveira , Sao Paulo, Brazil
                [3 ]departmentOncology , Hospital Sirio-Libanes , Sao Paulo, Brazil
                [4 ]departmentOncology , Instituto Alexander Fleming Instituto Privado de Oncología , Buenos Aires, Argentina
                [5 ]departmentThoraxic Oncology Unit , Instituto Nacional de Cancerología , Mexico, Mexico
                [6 ]departmentMedical Oncology , Center for Research and Management of Cancer , San Jose, Costa Rica
                [7 ]departmentThoraxic Oncology Unit , Instituto Alexander Fleming Instituto Privado de Oncología , Buenos Aires, Argentina
                [8 ]Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group , Porto Alegre, Brazil
                [9 ]departmentMedical Oncology , Grupo Oncoclínicas , Sao Paulo, Brazil
                [10 ]departmentPathology Department , Mayo Clinic Rochester , Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                [11 ]departmentClinical and Translational Oncology Group , Institute of Oncology, Clínica del Country , Bogota, Colombia
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Martín Osvaldo Angel; mangel@ 123456alexanderfleming.org ; Dr Andres F. Cardona; andres.cardona@ 123456clinicadelcountry.com
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1463-8887
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6271-105X
                Article
                Publisher ID: esmoopen-2020-000988
                DOI: 10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000988
                PMC ID: 7689104
                PubMed ID: 33234553
                SO-VID: f5befbf8-2e36-4e4a-8d83-0b277403c4c6
                Copyright © © Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, any changes made are indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                Date received : 15 August 2020
                Date revision received : 17 October 2020
                Date accepted : 19 October 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004325, AstraZeneca;
                Award ID: AAZPIRE Project
                Categories
                Subject: Review
                Subject: 1506
                Custom metadata
                special-feature unlocked

                Keywords: mentoring,research,education
                Data availability:
                Keywords: mentoring, research, education

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content134

                See all similar

                Cited by4

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors185

                See all reference authors