An analysis of gender disparities amongst United States medical students, general surgery residents, vascular surgery trainees, and the vascular surgery workforce.

Gender diversity in medicine continues to be a critical topic, and gender diversity within surgical fields remains an overarching challenge. In the following review, we objectively address the data available in terms of training slots for women in general and vascular surgery and within the vascular surgery workforce. Overall, women comprise 36% of active physicians in the 2019 Association of American Medical Colleges data. The number of women in surgical fields is lower representing 22% in general surgery, 9% in neurosurgery, 6% in orthopedic surgery, 17% in plastic surgery, 8% in thoracic surgery, and 15% in vascular surgery. Also notable is the lower academic ranks held by women in surgery. The proportion of women instructors in surgery in 2020 was 61%, assistant professors 30%, associate professors 23%, and full-time professors only 13.5%. There are multiple opportunities across the divisional/institutional/societal domains in which mentorship and sponsorship can promote gender equity and inclusion. Recruitment and retention of women and minorities into the vascular academic and private practices is essential to ensure best patient outcomes and quality of care for our patients. We hope that by shedding light on this topic, there will be greater awareness and improved strategies to address the disparities within institutions.

Gender trends of authors presenting at a regional vascular surgery meeting.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized a potential gender disparity within a regional society like the Southern Association of Vascular Surgery (SAVS) when compared with vascular surgery demographics in the region. To assess this, we analyzed meeting and membership participation at the SAVS compared with regional data from the Society of Vascular Surgery as well as board certification in vascular surgery published by the American Board of Surgery (ABS). METHODS: The published programs from the SAVS Annual Meeting from 2012 to 2019 were analyzed for membership, presenter gender, type, topic, discussant gender, moderator gender, postgraduate course presenter gender, and manuscript publication demographics. The ABS was petitioned and yearly Vascular Surgery diplomate (ABS-VS) gender from member states of the SAVS was examined for the same period. Fisher's exact Student's t-test and analysis of covariance were used. RESULTS: There were 257 total presentations (184 podium, 71.6%; 73 poster, 28.4%). A total of 61.4% (n = 43) of presentations by females were podium presentations, compared with 75.4% (n = 141) by males (P = .03). Females were less likely to be published when compared with their male counterparts (41.8% vs 58.7%, P = .02). The percentage of female gendered presenters statistically increased over the time period examined compared with a decrease in male presenters (R2 = 0.61, m = 1.27 vs R2 = 0.08, m = -0.35, P = .02). Female presenters had a female discussant 10.5% of the time compared with male presenters who had a male discussant 95.1% of the time (P < .0001). Females comprised 3.8% ± 1.1% of SAVS yearly membership compared with 12.0% ± 4.6% ABS-VS diplomates among SAVS member states (P < .0001). SAVS female membership significantly lagged behind the increase in ABS-VS female diplomate rate (P = .001). Only 39.1% of SAVS members were cross-listed in Society of Vascular Surgery membership rolls, with a total of 464 potential SAVS members, 11.2% or 52 of whom are female. CONCLUSIONS: We found that female presenters at the SAVS Annual Meeting were less likely to be podium presenters, interface with other female discussants, and publish manuscripts when compared with their male counterparts. Statistically, female members were underrepresented within the SAVS membership rolls when compared with known boarded female vascular surgeons among southern member states. This gender gap highlights a unique opportunity to enhance and potentially increase mentorship opportunities for female trainees who are presenting and/or attending this regional vascular surgery meeting.

Identifying institutional factors in general surgery resident wellness and burnout.

BACKGROUND: Effects of the institutional macrocosm on general surgery resident wellbeing have not been well studied. We sought to identify organizational factors that impact resident wellness and burnout. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi technique, an open-ended survey and two subsequent iterations were distributed to wellness stakeholders at two institutions to identify and stratify institutional factors in six burnout domains. RESULTS: Response rates for each survey round were 29/106 (27%), 30/46 (65%) and 21/30 (70%). Top factors identified in each domain were: CONCLUSION: A modified Delphi technique prioritized institutional wellness and burnout factors. Top factors identified were compensation, vacation time, and autonomy. These results can direct future scholarship of barriers/facilitators of resident wellbeing.

Analysis of authorship trends in vascular surgery demonstrates a sticky surgical floor for women.

OBJECTIVE: Prior research in vascular surgery has identified significant gender disparities in leadership positions, but few data exist regarding gender disparities in vascular publications. This study aims to evaluate authorship trends by gender in the three highest impact factor vascular surgery journals. METHODS: In this bibliometric analysis, PubMed was searched for articles published in the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, the Journal of Vascular Surgery, and Annals of Vascular Surgery from 2015 to 2019. The web-based application Genderize used predictive algorithms to classify names of first and last authors as male or female. Statistical analyses regarding trends in authorship were performed using Stata16. RESULTS: A total of 6457 articles were analyzed, with first author gender predicted with >90% confidence in 83% (4889/5796) and last author gender in 88% (5078/5796). Overall, 25% (1223/4889) of articles had women first authors, and 10% (501/5078) had women last authors. From 2015 to 2019, there was a slight increase in the proportion of articles written by women first authors (P = .001), but no increase in the proportion of articles written by women last authors (P = .204). The proportion of articles written by women last authors was lower than the proportion of active women vascular surgeons in 2015 (8% of articles vs 11% of surgeons; P = .015), 2017 (9% of articles vs 13% of surgeons; P < .001), and 2019 (11% of articles vs 15% of practicing surgeons; P < .001). The average number of last-author publications was higher for men (2.35 ± 3.76) than for women (1.62 ± 1.88, P = .001). The proportion of unique authors who were women was less than the proportion of active women vascular surgeons in 2017 (10% unique authors vs 13% surgeons; P = .047), but not in 2015 (9% unique authors vs 11% surgeons; P = .192) or 2019 (13% unique authors vs 15% surgeons; P = .345). Notably, a woman last author was associated with 1.45 higher odds of having a woman first author (95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.79; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 5 years, there has been no significant increase in women last authors among top-tier journals in vascular surgery. Women remain under-represented as last authors in terms of proportion of published articles, but not in terms of proportion of unique authors. Nevertheless, women last authors are more likely to publish with women first authors, indicating the importance of women-led mentorship in achieving publication gender equity. Support for women surgeons through grants and promotions is essential not only for advancing last authorship gender equity, but for advancing junior faculty and trainee academic careers.

Interview experience, post-interview communication, and gender-based differences in the integrated vascular surgery residency match.

OBJECTIVE: Integrated vascular surgery residency (IVSR) applicant perspective about the match process has been rarely studied, yet this has important implications on trainee recruitment. We sought to better understand the nature of the interview process and post-interview communication and its impact on students' ranking choices. METHODS: A voluntary and anonymous survey was sent to students who matched to IVSR in 2020, inquiring about interviews, post-interview communications, and factors influencing students' rank lists. RESULTS: Seventy of the 73 matched students completed the survey (96% response rate; 23 female and 47 male respondents). Applicants reported they were asked questions about other programs of interest (81.4%), top choice programs (65.7%), marital status (32.9%), family planning (7.1%), and religion (1.4%) during interviews. Female applicants were more frequently asked questions about family planning (17.4% vs 2.1%; P < .01) and marital status (52.5% vs 23.4%; P < .01) compared with male applicants. After interviews, 92.9% of applicants notified their top choice program of their ranking preference. Of applicants, 61.4% received post-interview communication with regards to ranking from at least one program, initiated by program directors in 81.3% of instances. Among these applicants, 58.1% reported that the post-interview communication had an impact on their rank list, and 46.5% matched at a program by which they were contacted. Of applicants, 5.7% were asked by a program to reveal their ranking of the program, and 11.4% were promised by a program to be ranked first if the applicant reciprocally ranked them first. Female and male applicants weighed program culture, operative volume, mentorship, and prestige equally in making their rank list. Male applicants weighed the sub-internship experience more significantly; however, female applicants weighed the sub-internship experience, personal relationships in certain cities, dedicated professional development years, and large female representation in the program more heavily (P < .02). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into the interview experience and impactful factors for the vascular surgery match. Both female and male applicants were asked a high number of questions about personal matters unrelated to medical school performance. Female applicants, however, experienced a higher proportion of these instances, particularly regarding family planning. These findings demonstrate the factors that are important to applicants in the match process and raises awareness of potential challenges in the interview and recruitment process.

Mentorship in Plastic Surgery: A Critical Appraisal of Where We Stand and What We Can Do Better.

SUMMARY: Mentorship is a critical tool for professional development and career success. In academic surgery, supportive mentorship affords higher job satisfaction, academic productivity, and diversity and inclusion. It protects against burnout and increasing academic surgery attrition rates. Women, underrepresented minorities, and junior plastic surgeons report lower job satisfaction and fewer mentorship opportunities. Given the unique challenges these groups face in a constantly changing health care system, the importance of mentorship cannot be overstated. Through a survey of American Society of Plastic Surgeons members, this study evaluated different aspects of mentorship to describe the current state in plastic surgery. Despite 94.05 percent of plastic surgeons believing that mentorship is valuable, only 15.16 percent reported a structured mentorship system, often without evaluation. Male and female participants agree that mentorship is needed for both professional (clinical judgment) and personal (work-life balance) development. Interestingly, women plastic surgeons felt it was important for mentees to have gender and race/ethnicity concordance to their mentors (p < 0.001). There was no agreement regarding the most effective method to implement mentorship programs, highlighting the challenges of this problem. Through thoughtful planning and commitment, mentorship programs can be instituted to benefit not just the mentee, but the mentor as well.

Does Gender Matter in Academic Surgery? Author and Mentor Gender Impact Publication Citations in Surgical Research.

OBJECTIVE: To examine female author representation within publications in the field of urology from the United States from 2000-2019. METHODS: All 25,787 articles with a U.S. correspondence address published in the two largest U.S. headquartered general urology journals, Urology and Journal of Urology, were analyzed from 2000-2019. Gender was assigned to each first and last author based on the author's first name. First names were matched to a database of U.S. Social Security Administration data to determine gender. RESULTS: Overall female authorship, female senior authorship, and female first authorship exhibited a significant upward trend from 2000 to 2019 (P <0.001, P <0.001, P = 0.002). As the number of female last authors increased, female last authors were significantly more likely to publish with female first authors, and significantly less likely publish with male first authors (P <0.001, P <0.001). Furthermore, we found a significant difference for female authors being less likely to get cited than male authors (p = 0.02), despite the greater proportion of females that authored research articles with higher citation counts compared to males (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite the significant progress in female representation within urological publications, female-authored publications continue to constitute a smaller proportion of the urological literature and are less likely to be cited. Our study provides the first evidence on the current status of female underrepresentation within academic urology and literature productivity at this watershed moment. As the number of female urologists evolves, these findings will be of significant impact in the advancement of female investigators in urology.

Transition to Independent Research Funding Among National Institutes of Health K Grant Awardees at Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports mentored research career development awards (K awards) to increase the pipeline of independently funded scientists. This study analyzed the portfolio of K grants that were awarded to orthopaedic surgery departments and characterized the factors that were associated with successful transition to independent NIH research funding, including R01 grants. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of K-award recipients in orthopaedic surgery departments in the United States from 1996 to 2018. A query was performed on the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) database for NIH grants that were awarded to departments of orthopaedic surgery, general surgery, otolaryngology, obstetrics and gynecology, ophthalmology, and urology. Rates of transition to independent research funding were compared by specialty for K grants that were awarded from 1996 to 2011. The percentage of faculty with mentored research career development awards and the return on investment (ROI) were calculated. An internet and Scopus (Elsevier) database search determined the investigator characteristics. The factors that were associated with successful transition to independent funding were determined via chi-square and unpaired t tests. RESULTS: Sixty K-award recipients were identified in orthopaedic surgery departments. Most were men (77%) and research scientists (53%). Fifty percent of the K-award recipients transitioned to independent research funding. Research scientists had the highest rate of transition to independent research funding (71%, p = 0.016) relative to clinicians (0%) and orthopaedic surgeons (40%). Higher levels of publication productivity were associated with successful transition to independent research funding. Similar rates of transition to independent research funding existed among surgical specialties (p = 0.107). Orthopaedic surgery had the lowest percentage of faculty with a K award (1.4%) but had the highest ROI (198%) of these awards. CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic surgery had similar rates of transition to independent research funding when compared with other surgical specialties but had a lower prevalence of K awards among faculty. Orthopaedic surgeon-scientists have lower rates of transition to independent research funding when compared with their research-scientist colleagues. These findings highlight a need for greater support to foster the pipeline of future NIH-funded orthopaedic investigators. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As the largest support of biomedical research in the U.S., the NIH is an important stakeholder in orthopaedic innovations and discoveries. This study highlights barriers in the procurement of NIH funding across surgical specialties and affirms the need for greater resources toward supporting NIH funding in orthopaedic surgery.

Why Interested Surgeons Are Not Choosing Rural Surgery: What Can We Do Now?

BACKGROUND: There is a growing deficit of rural surgeons, and preparation to meet this need is inadequate. More research into stratifying factors that specifically influence choice in rural versus urban practice is needed. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved survey related to factors influencing rural practice selection and increasing rural recruitment was distributed through the American College of Surgeons. The results were analyzed descriptively and thematically. RESULTS: Of 416 respondents (74% male), 287 (69%) had previous rural experience. Of those, 71 (25%) did not choose rural practice; lack of professional or hospital support (30%) and lifestyle (26%) were the primary reasons. A broad scope of practice was most important among surgeons (52%), who chose rural practice without any previous rural experience. Over 60% of urban practitioners agreed that improved lifestyle and financial advantages would attract them to rural practice. The thematic analysis suggested institutional support, affiliation with academic institutions, and less focus on subspecialty fellowship could help increase the number of rural surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence surgeons' decisions on practice location. Providing appropriate hospital support in rural areas and promoting specific aspects of rural practice, including broad scope of practice to those in training could help grow interest in rural surgery. Strong collaboration with academic institutions for teaching, learning, and mentoring opportunities for rural surgeons could also lead to higher satisfaction, security, and potentially higher retention rate. These results provide a foundation to help focus specific efforts and resources in the recruitment and retention of rural surgeons.

How to Support a Surgeon Scientist: Lessons from National Institutes of Health K-Award Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Success in academic surgery is challenging and research cannot survive without funding. NIH K-awards are designed to mentor junior investigators to achieve independence. As a result we aimed to study K awardees in departments of surgery and learn from their experience. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Utilizing the NIH RePORTer database and filtering by department of surgery, clinically active surgeons receiving a K-award between 2008 and 2018 were asked to complete an online survey. Qualitative data from two open-ended questions were coded independently using standard qualitative methods by three researchers. Using grounded theory, major themes emerged from the codes. RESULTS: Of the 144 academic surgeons identified, 89 (62%) completed the survey. The average age was 39 ± 3 when the K-award was granted. Most identified as white (69%). Men (70%) were more likely to be married (P = 0.02) and have children (P = 0.05). To identify intention to pursue R01 funding, surgeons having a K-award for 5 y or more were analyzed (n = 45). Most either intended to (11%) or had already applied (80%) of which 36% were successful. Men were more likely to apply (P = 0.05). Major themes to succeed include protected time, mentorship, and support from leadership. Common barriers to overcome include balancing time, pressures to be clinically productive, and funding. CONCLUSIONS: The demographics and career trajectory of NIH K-awarded surgeons is described. The lack of underrepresented minorities receiving grants is concerning. Most recipients required more than one application attempt and plan to or have applied for R01 funding. The major themes were very similar; a supportive environment and time available for research are the most crucial factors to succeed as an academic surgeon.

Study of Shadowing Experiences among Chaplains in the Coleman Palliative Medicine Fellowship.

While shadowing is a relatively common practice in the education of many health professionals, it is not widely used in chaplaincy education. Findings from our qualitative study of 12 chaplains who participated in the Coleman Palliative Medicine Training Program suggest it may offer benefits for practicing chaplains. In interviews with seven fellows who shadowed more experienced palliative care (PC) chaplains and the five mentors who were shadowed at their work settings, participants reported opportunities for mutual learning, self-reflection, and collegiality. Fellows observed how members of a PC team collaborate and contribute equally to the care of patients. Mentors found shadowing was a rare opportunity to share their chaplaincy practice with colleagues. It helped them to appreciate different aspects of their work settings and to distinguish between PC and generalist chaplaincy. We discuss the challenges participants experienced while shadowing and offer recommendations for incorporating the practice more widely into chaplaincy education.

Mentorship Effectiveness in Cardiothoracic Surgical Training.

BACKGROUND: Mentoring is an essential component of cardiothoracic surgery training, yet trainees report varied experiences despite substantial efforts to enhance mentorship opportunities. This study aimed to evaluate mentorship effectiveness and identify gaps in mentorship education. METHODS: A survey was distributed to cardiothoracic surgical trainees in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs (n = 531). Responses to 16 questions concerning trainee experiences, expectations, and perspectives on mentorship were collected. An 11-component mentorship effectiveness tool generated a composite score (0 to 55), with a score of 44 or lower indicating less effective mentorship. RESULTS: Sixty-seven residents completed the survey (12.6%), with most (83.6%) reporting a current mentor. Trainees with mentors cited "easy to work with and approachable" (44 of 58; 75.9%) as the major criterion for mentor selection, whereas trainees without a mentor reported an inability to identify one who truly reflected the resident's needs (6 of 11; 45.5%). Resident age, gender, race or ethnicity, marital status, family status, postgraduate year, and training program type or size were not associated with having a mentor (P = .15 to .73). The median mentorship effectiveness score was 51 (interquartile range, 44, 55). More than one-third of residents (25 of 67) had either no mentor (n = 6) or less effective mentorship (n = 16), or both (n = 3). Resident and program characteristics were not associated with mentorship effectiveness (P = .39 to .99). Finally, 61.2% of residents had not received education on effective mentorship, and 53.8% did not currently serve as a mentor. CONCLUSIONS: Many resident respondents have either no mentor or less effective mentorship, and most reported not having received education on mentorship. Addressing these gaps in mentorship training and delivery should be prioritized.

Gender Differences in Compensation, Mentorship, and Work-Life Balance within Facial Plastic Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to identify gender differences in work-life balance, professional advancement, workload, salary, and career satisfaction among facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-Sectional Survey. METHODS: American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS) members were invited by email to respond to a confidential 25-question online survey. The survey had a response rate of 12%. There were a total of 139 participants; 23 participants were in training and 116 were either board-eligible or board-certified facial plastic surgeons. Collected variables included general demographics, personal life, academic involvement, career development, workload, and career satisfaction. RESULTS: Forty percent of participants were female. Fifty-nine percent of female participants were 25-35 years old compared with 15% of male participants. The majority of male participants were over 45 years old (63%) while only 19% of female participants fell into this age category (P < .0001). Women were more likely to be in a relationship with a physician (35% vs. 19%) or non-physician full-time professional (55% vs. 31%). The vast majority of men had children (89%) while only half of women (52%) had children. On average, women with children had fewer children than men (P < .0001). No gender difference was seen with respect to working full versus part-time (P = .81). Participants were equally satisfied with a surgical career regardless of gender. CONCLUSION: Although significant progress has already been made towards closing the gender gap, gender disparities remain both professionally and personally for facial plastic surgeons. With an increasing number of women in medicine, we should continue to strive to close the gender gap. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:E787-E791, 2021.

Why dermatology is the second least diverse specialty in medicine: How did we get here?

Dermatology is currently the second least diverse medical specialty, after orthopedic surgery, with only a minority of physicians identifying as underrepresented in medicine (UIM). To diversify our specialty, our understanding and recognition of multifactorial barriers to inclusivity such as financial barriers, lack of mentorship, and the implicit bias against minorities UIM is critical. With collaborative efforts by national dermatology organizations, dermatology residency programs, and medical schools to increase the presence of UIM dermatology physicians in the US health care, this important issue continues to receive the attention it deserves.

Pioneers in Modern Craniofacial Surgery: Assessing the Academic Impact of Drs. Joseph Gruss and Paul Manson.

BACKGROUND: The authors conducted this study to assess the impact that Drs. Joseph Gruss and Paul Manson have had on craniofacial surgery through their individual contributions and through their trainees. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of fellows trained by either Dr. Gruss or Dr. Manson. Demographic and bibliometric measures were recorded for each fellow. Demographic factors included years since completion of fellowship training, current practice of craniomaxillofacial surgery, academic practice, and academic leadership roles. Bibliometric measures included number of publications, number of citations, and h-index. To adjust for scholarly activity before fellowship training, only contributions published after fellowship training were included. RESULTS: Over a 39-year period, a total of 86 surgeons completed fellowship training with either of the two principal surgeons. The mean time since completion of training was 18.7 ± 11.4 years. Seventy-nine percent of surgeons had active practices in craniomaxillofacial surgery; 54 percent had academic practices. The mean number of publications was 26.4 ± 69.3, the mean number of citations was 582 ± 2406, and the average h-index was 6.7 ± 10.6. Among academic surgeons, the average h-index was 10.7 ± 13.1, 89 percent practiced in North America, 89 percent had active practices in craniomaxillofacial surgery, and nearly 50 percent had achieved a leadership role. CONCLUSIONS: Modern craniofacial reconstruction has evolved from principles used in trauma and correction of congenital differences. The extensive impact that Drs. Paul Manson and Joseph Gruss have had on the field, and plastic surgery at large, is evident through their primary contributions and the immense impact their trainees have had on the field.

Global Impact of Social Media on Women in Surgery.

The professional use of social media is increasingly prevalent today, particularly in medicine and surgery. Several recent movements have highlighted the strengths of this forum for networking and mentorship for females in surgery who otherwise may lack mentors locally. We sought to describe modern uses for and strengths of social media for women in surgery globally via a systematic review of the literature. Multiple efforts and avenues have promoted gender equality in surgery, while also uniting female surgeons in a collaborative virtual network of colleagues. In particular, movements on Twitter, such as #ILookLikeASurgeon and #NYerORCoverChallenge, as well as other collaborative virtual fora have brought visibility to female surgeons, while drawing the young population of students and trainees toward surgical careers. Social media provides a unique opportunity for female trainees and established surgeons alike to network and establish mentorship relationships, which may aid in fostering interest in surgery and closing the gender gap in our field.

Youth Enjoy Science Program at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center: Increasing Engagement and Opportunity for Underrepresented Minority Students.

The Youth Enjoy Science (YES) Program at the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center is a National Cancer Institute (NCI) R25-funded training grant, designed to increase the pipeline of underrepresented minority (URM) students entering college and pursuing biomedical research and health care careers in the Cleveland Metropolitan and surrounding school districts. The three components of the program include: Learn to Beat Cancer, engaging middle school students and their families; Research to Beat Cancer, designed for high school students and college undergraduates; and Teach to Beat Cancer, focused on enhancing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teaching capacity among high school teachers. This study focuses on Research to Beat Cancer, which, in 2018 enrolled 36 URM students as paid summer scholars. Students were assigned to a faculty mentor, were taught laboratory safety, responsible conduct of research and the scientific method, and then immersed in full-time laboratory cancer research during an eight-week period. Twice each week, students participated in Lunch and Learn Seminars where faculty members provided combined motivational and scientific guidance lectures. In a capstone poster session at the end of the program, students presented their research to peers, medical and graduate students, family members, faculty, community members and leaders. Students' perceptions of the program were reported using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analyses. Twenty-four of the 2018 YES students (67%) and 19 (53%) mentors completed the online post-program survey. Opportunity was a major qualitative theme from student and mentor responses. Future research will investigate the long-term impacts of YES, including college enrollment.

Understanding surgical education needs in Zambian residency programs from a Resident's perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 100 surgeons in Zambia serve a population of 16 million, a severe shortage in basic surgical care. Surgical education in Zambia and other low-middle income countries has not been well characterized. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical training resources from a resident perspective. METHODS: 6 of 8 COSECSA-accredited major medical centers were included. We developed a Surgical Education Capacity Tool to evaluate hospital characteristics including infrastructure, education, and research. The questionnaire was completed by administrators and trainees. RESULTS: 18 of 45 trainees were surveyed. Caseloads and faculty-to-trainee ratio varied by location. No sites had surgical skills, simulation, or research labs. Most had medical libraries, lecture halls, and internet. Outpatient clinics, bedside teaching, M&M conferences, and senior supervision were widely available. Despite some exposure, research mentorship, basic science, and grant application guidance were critically limited. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of access to proper infrastructure, research, and personnel all impact surgical training and education. The Surgical Education Capacity Tool offers insights into areas of potential improvement, and is applicable to other LMICs.

Implementing and Evaluating a Mentor Training to Improve Support for Early-Career Scholars in Tobacco Regulatory Science.

INTRODUCTION: To implement and evaluate a blended online and in-person training to help mentors of early-career researchers appreciate the complexities of Tobacco Regulatory Science (TRS), refine TRS mentoring skills, and become acquainted with resources for providing effective guidance to TRS mentees. METHODS: TRS mentors engaged in a two-part pilot test of the training program. Authors evaluated both the online and in-person training using retrospective pre-post evaluations, which measure learning at the conclusion of a training program, and post-program focus groups. Twenty learners completed the online training, and 16 learners attended the in-person training module. Nine participants completed evaluations for the online module, and 12 participants completed evaluations for the in-person module. RESULTS: Program assessments revealed that participants found that the training achieved its overall goals. The majority of respondents (87.5%) rated the online portion of the training as valuable. For the in-person training, participants reported statistically significant improvements regarding confidence in: helping mentees to identify skills and training to effectively pursue TRS, assisting mentees in weighing career trajectories, and guiding mentees in conducting research responsive to TRS regulatory priorities. CONCLUSIONS: The novel mentoring program was well received by faculty seeking to strengthen skills for mentoring early-career TRS researchers to navigate the complex landscape of TRS, explore diverse funding opportunities, and discern potential career trajectories. It provided unique content to address issues outside the traditional tobacco research training curriculum and offered specific information on regulatory policies, priorities, and opportunities. IMPLICATIONS: This research documents the deployment and evaluation of a blended online and in-person training program for investigators mentoring early-career researchers working in TRS. Our assessment discovered that participants found the training to be valuable to their overall mentoring objectives. The training comprises a novel curriculum for investigators engaged in mentoring early-career researchers in a unique field, thus filling a deficit in the published literature by presenting a curriculum that has been customized to the unique needs of TRS mentors.