Clinical Science Training at the University of Colorado

Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, United States
Journal of Investigative Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.69). 06/2007; 55(4):181-6. DOI: 10.2310/6650.2007.06030
Source: PubMed


Clinical science (CLSC) research education differs from basic science education in that many CLSC programs have an added goal of creating successful academicians. CLSC programs have expanded curricula that include teaching career development techniques, such as manuscript and grant writing, and helping young investigators establish successful mentor-mentee relationships.
A group of K30 CLSC training program students coordinated a pilot survey to determine if the CLSC training programs at the University of Colorado were meeting the needs of the participants in both didactic courses and in other aspects of academic medicine, including research. The small group survey was conducted as part of a clinical outcomes assessment course. Opportunities for improvement in the CLSC training programs were explored based on the results.
Of 117 CLSC training program participants surveyed, 56% responded. Overall, there was a positive improvement found for the didactic CLSC research constructs. Participants also reported success in manuscript publication and grant writing applications. The CLSC program, however, was not successful in coordinating faculty mentor support for student research projects for 78% of respondents. Once a mentoring relationship was established, students were satisfied with the mentoring they received.
In general, CLSC trainees were satisfied that the K30 clinical research curriculum was meeting their needs. Many of the trainees were successful in developing academic skills during the program. Establishing a mentor relationship was the missing ingredient within the K30 CLSC training program. This may be an important component that should be considered when developing programs to create the next generation of clinician-scientists.

Download full-text


Available from: Annie Laurie W Shroyer, Feb 06, 2014
1 Follower
19 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mentoring is advocated as an essential adjunct in work-based learning providing support in career and noncareer related issues. This study aims to investigate trainee experiences and satisfaction with mentoring arrangements. E-mail survey of surgical trainees from the East of England Higher Surgical Training Deanery, UK. Factors affecting presence of a mentoring relationship and satisfaction with mentoring arrangements were analyzed. Of all respondents, 62.85% stated that they were not sure or did not have a mentor; 34.29% said that they had had a meaningful meeting with their mentor; 57.14% said that they were aware of the responsibilities of a mentor; 34.29% strongly agreed or agreed that mentoring had been useful; 25.71% said that mentoring had been useful in career development; and 20% found it useful in noncareer related issues. Of those with a mentor, only 31.43% were satisfied with mentoring. Factors affecting satisfaction with mentoring included having had a meaningful meeting, having clear objectives set, and help in job transition and noncareer related issues. Knowledge of a mentor's responsibilities was also associated with satisfaction. The only factor associated with the presence of a mentoring relationship was having a mentor appointed. We advocate the establishment of a mentoring matching scheme for mentors and mentees together with mentor training to improve mentoring provision for surgical trainees.
    Journal of Surgical Education 01/2010; 67(1):19-24. DOI:10.1016/j.jsurg.2009.10.004 · 1.38 Impact Factor