Evaluating the Impact of a Year-Long External Mentorship Pilot Program in Classical Hematology

Introduction: Mentorship and access to role models in hematology/oncology (H/O), particularly in classical hematology (CH), are important factors in positively influencing trainee career decisions. However, mentorship opportunities are perceived as more accessible in oncology than hematology. Most mentorship experiences occur within an institution; therefore, creating access to external mentors may benefit trainees interested in CH if these opportunities are lacking. In April 2021, a year-long external mentorship pilot program (EMPP) developed through the ASH Medical Educators Institute was implemented to pair H/O fellows pursuing CH careers with faculty at external institutions. This mixed methods study aims to evaluate feasibility and impact of the program on personal satisfaction, academic productivity, access to networking opportunities, and career development of trainees interested in CH.

Methods: Details about the EMPP were disseminated to fellowship program directors, social media, and listservs; 35 adult and pediatric H/O fellows applied, and all were accepted. Fellows were paired by 1 investigator (S.J.P.) with 34 mentors who were recruited based on hematology expertise and academic productivity (Figure 1). A 34- and 25-item survey was distributed to mentees and mentors, respectively, at the end of the program. Multiple choice, 5-point Likert-type Scale, and free text items were used to gather quantitative and qualitative data on their experiences. Participants were assumed to agree to a statement if they chose "agree" or "strongly agree" for Likert-type Scale items. Free text comments were analyzed by 2 investigators (Z.Q. and S.J.P.) with themes identified and agreed upon by both.

Results: Twenty-eight (80.0%) mentees self-identified as female and 7 (20.0%) as male. Sixteen (45.7%) were White, 12 (34.3%) were Asian, 2 (5.7%) were Black, 1 (2.9%) was Arab, and 1 (2.9%) was White and Native American. Three (8.6%) were Hispanic. Thirteen (37.1%) and 22 (62.9%) were in or accepted into an adult or pediatric H/O program, respectively. There were 10 first-year (28.6%), 16 second-year (45.7%), 7 third-year fellows (20.0%), and 2 third-year pediatrics residents (5.7%); following inception of the program, all participants advanced a year in their training. Each mentee was paired with 1 mentor, with 1 mentor matched to 2 mentees. Thirty-three pairs (94.3%) completed the program. Thirty-one mentees (91.2%) and 26 mentors (78.9%) completed a post-program survey, which was distributed to 34 mentees and 33 mentors, as 1 pair started the program 4 months off cycle. Twenty-nine (93.5%) mentees and 22 (84.6%) mentors agreed that their pairing was a good match. In free text comments, mentees and mentors wrote that "similar interests" made their pairings successful. Mentees noted "approachability", "significant experience in mentoring," and similar "personality" as reasons why their mentor was a good match. Twenty mentees (64.5%) believed that this program increased their academic productivity, and 23 (74.2%) indicated that they had scholarly work published, submitted, or in progress as a result of the program (Table 1). Eighteen mentees (58.1%) connected with other faculty outside of their mentor through the program. Twenty-four mentees (77.4%) indicated that the program facilitated their career development, through obtaining "career advice" and finding a "sense of community." One participant wrote "[a]s a Black male meeting [mentor] and getting his direct mentorship provided me safety and permission to live up to my dream of being a physician scientist." Over half of mentees (54.8%) and mentors (53.8%) plan to continue their mentoring relationship beyond the required 1 year duration. Thirty mentees (96.8%) and 24 mentors (92.3%) agreed that they would recommend this program to other fellows and faculty, respectively.

Conclusion: This EMPP was feasible as all applicants were matched with a mentor and most pairs completed the program. The program positively impacted the experience of fellows interested in CH in terms of personal satisfaction, academic productivity, access to networking opportunities, and career development. Factors leading to the program's success included strong mentee-mentor pairings, involvement in scholarly work, and connecting with CH faculty. Given the feasibility and positive reception, we plan to continue and expand the program beyond its pilot sites.

Connell:Doximity: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. King:Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reid:Xencor: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Epicentrx: Other: Spouse is employed by epicentrx. Park:Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.