Title
Facilitated Peer Mentorship to Support Aging Research: A RE-AIM Evaluation of the CoMPAdRE Program
Date Issued
01 April 2019
Access level
open access
Resource Type
journal article
Author(s)
Masterson Creber R.M.
Brown P.J.
Rao M.K.
Goyal P.
Hummel S.
Dodson J.A.
Helmke S.
Maurer M.S.
Columbia University
Publisher(s)
Blackwell Publishing Inc.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The need for mentorship in aging research among postdoctoral trainees and junior faculty across medical disciplines and subspecialties is increasing, yet senior personnel with expertise in aging are lacking to fulfill the traditional dyadic mentorship role. Facilitated peer mentorship is grounded in collaborative work among peers with the guidance of a senior mentor. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated the Columbia University Mentor Peer Aging Research (CoMPAdRE) program, an interprofessional facilitated peer mentorship program for early stage investigators, using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance framework (RE-AIM). Reach: A total of 15 participants, of which 20% were women, from five states and across six medical specialties participated. Effectiveness: Participants published 183 papers, of which more than 20% were collaborative papers between CoMPAdRE mentees or mentees-mentor. Participants reported developing skills in negotiation, navigating the academic role, organizing a seminar, management, and leadership over the course of the program. According to the qualitative findings, the most important components of the program included alignment around the aging, learning from national leaders, developing leadership skills and career networking. Adoption: Individual-level factors included selecting participants with a research track record, willingness to sign a compact of commitment and involvement in shaping the program. An institutional-level factor that facilitated program adoption included strong commitment from department leaders. Implementation: The program cost $3,259 per participant. Maintenance: CoMPAdRE is being maintained and currently incorporating a second cohort of mentees. CONCLUSION: This RE-AIM evaluation provides lessons learned and strategies for future adoption, implementation, and maintenance of an aging-focused facilitated peer mentorship program. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:804–810, 2019.
Start page
804
End page
810
Volume
67
Issue
4
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Geriatría, Gerontología
Subjects
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-85060941730
PubMed ID
Source
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
ISSN of the container
00028614
Sponsor(s)
We would like to acknowledge the administrative assistance of Dr. Sergio Teryua and Samantha Guadalupe from the Clinical Cardiovascular Research Laboratory for the Elderly, Allen Hospital of New York Presbyterian, Columbia University Irving Medical Center. We would also like to thank all of the CoMPAdRE members for their commitment to the facilitated mentorship program. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the guest faculty (named in Supplementary Table 2), most of whom volunteered their time to come and speak to the CoMPAdRE participants. Mid-Career Mentoring Award in Geriatric Cardiology, K24: AG036778 (PI: Maurer). National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Nursing Research, R00: NR016275 (PI: Masterson Creber). National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging, K23: AG045560 (PI: Baldwin). National Institute for Mental Health, K23: MH099097 (PI: Brown). National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging, Patient-Oriented Career Development Award, K23: AG052463 (PI: Dodson). National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging, R03:AG053294 (PI: Rao). National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging, R03: AG056446 (PI: Goyal). Veterans Administration, 5I01 CX001636 (PI: Hummel). All authors have declared no conflict of interest for this article. Ruth M. Masterson Creber: drafting of manuscript, data collection, and data analysis. Matthew R. Baldwin: data collection, data analysis, and substantive edits to manuscript. Patrick J. Brown: data collection, data analysis, and substantive edits to manuscript. Maya K. Rao, Parag Goyal, Scott Hummel, and John A. Dodson: substantive edits to manuscript. Stephen Helmke: data collection and substantive edits to manuscript. Mathew S. Maurer: funding, study design, data collection, data analysis, and substantive edits to manuscript. Sponsor's Role: None.
Both individual and institutional aspects facilitated the successful adoption of CoMPAdRE. All participants had a track record of clinical research experience in aging, signed a compact to participate in the 2-year program, and had a high level of buy-in because they themselves chose the topics to address at each session. Institutional-level factors that supported the adoption of CoMPAdRE program included minimal financial commitment because the CoMPAdRE programming costs were supported by a National Institute on Aging (NIA) K24 award (PI: Maurer), division and department chiefs agreeing to protect participants’ time away from work to participate in the day-long retreats, and travel expenses for nonlocal participants.
We assessed program effectiveness based on (1) participant publications, grants, and career advancements achieved during the 2-year program, and (2) participant feedback from a structured survey that we administered at the end of the 2-year program. We ascertained participant publications and classified them as first author, senior author, and/or coauthored with a CoMPAdRE participant. We ascertained participant grants from NIH RePORTER. Before each CoMPAdRE retreat, participants reported recent honors/ awards, grant submissions, and conference presentations. At the end of the program, we used Qualtrics Survey software to administer a 16-item survey to assess improvement in grantsmanship, organizational, leadership, and research skill development on a 7-item response Likert scale. The survey included solicited open-ended feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of CoMPAdRE, challenges to participation, and aspects of the program that might need to be changed or improved. The study was approved by the Columbia institutional review board (Protocol AAAR8784).
Sources of information:
Directorio de Producción Científica
Scopus