Article 1
Growing the next generation of trauma surgeon-scientists: Reflections on 20 years of research investment. Callcut RA, Dixon R, Smith JW, Zarzaur B. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2022 Sep 1;93(3):340-346.
This article is a scoping review of the last 20 years of research investment by EAST. In addition, it provides a summary of the early experience of the INVEST-C program. Despite major surgical societies including EAST awarding research scholarships for more than 20 years, there has been a progressive decline in the development of surgeon-scientists, with only 0.7% of all US surgeons were NIH funded as of 2020. As a result of declining NIH awards to surgeon-scientists, EAST developed the INVEST-C program to mentor junior investigators and propel them towards research independence.
This study compared the effectiveness of EAST’s one-time research awards with the 2-day intensive mentoring INVEST-C program. Acquisition of NIH funding and publication productivity were compared for scholarship awardees (2002-2021) and INVEST-C participants (2017-2020). Number of publications, h-index and successful NIH funding were compared between the two groups. Results showed that the scholarship recipients had 35% success rate for 20 years in converting their research award into an NIH extramural award. These results are especially encouraging over the most recent 10 years, where nearly 60% have received at least one NIH award. In addition, more than 31% of INVEST-C mentees have received independent funding within 2 years of participation, and they have achieved equal impact of their research to those who are within 5 years of receiving the EAST Research Scholarship These results are extremely promising, and the EAST membership can be confident that the organization is fulfilling its mission of advancing science, fostering relationships and building careers.
Article 2
Power of mentorship for civilian and military acute care surgeons: identifying and leveraging opportunities for longitudinal professional development. Knowlton LM, Bulter WJ, Dumas RP, Bankhead BK, Meizoso JP, Bruns B, Van Gent JM, Kaafarani HMA, Martin MJ, Namias N, Stein DM, Tadlock MD, Martin RS, Staudenmayer KL, Gurney JM. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2023 Feb 27;8(1) e001049.
This is an opinion paper based on an expert panel that convened during the 81st Annual AAST meeting in September 2022. The session entitled “The Power of Mentorship” was a collaboration between the AAST Associate Member Council, the AAST Military Liaison Committee and the AAST Healthcare Economics Committee. It consisted of five genuine mentor-mentee pairs and addressed various categories of mentorship. This paper was created to summarize the recommendations, pearls and pitfalls that came from that panel session. The specific areas of mentorship were clinical, research, executive leadership, mentorship through professional societies and mentorship for military-trained surgeons.
Breaking it down into each section, the panel notes successful clinical mentorship relies on two crucial steps. First, the mentee must find a mentor that practices in the mentee’s clinical area of interest. Second, the pair must commit to open and honest communication. This creates a safe environment to discuss successes and failures and allows the mentee to receive honest feedback on how to improve as they advance in their operative career.
Next, successful research and executive leadership mentorship requires thoughtful selection of a mentor by assessing their institutional roles, online faculty profiles, prior mentorship relationships, similarity of research interests and time commitment. Mentees must be responsible for their own academic productivity, meet deadlines and come to meetings prepared. Mentors must make sure they have the time and skill set necessary before committing to the relationship. Ultimately, a good mentor allows the mentee to shine and therefore is successful through the successes of the mentee.
In mentorship through professional societies, the panel recommends several organizations that offer specific mentorship opportunities that are helpful for networking and advancement in academic societies. Examples include EAST Mentoring Family, AAST Associate Member Mentoring scholarship and the ACS COT Future Trauma Leaders program.
Lastly, military mentorship can be challenging due to the uncertainties that lie within deployment, maintaining operative proficiency and whether a fellowship is planned after service is completed. Strong mentorship in this area is extremely important as mentees often have limited options and resources once in an austere environment. Mentors can help by giving advice on billet choices and available leadership positions as well as helping the mentee find opportunities to influence military medicine policy. Mentors can also assist in identifying military opportunities within academic societies.
Overall, the panel recognizes that mentorship for the acute care surgeon is complex but incredibly rewarding. If done successfully, it can lead to lifelong relationships that advance the careers of both the mentee and the mentors.
Article 3
Career Advancement for Surgeon-Educators:Findings from a Modified Delphi Process. Cochran A, Neumayer LA, Mellinger JD, Klingensmith ME, Scott DJ, Dunnington GL, Brasel KJ. J Surg Educ. 2022 Jan-Feb;79(1):173-178.
This article describes a study that used a modified Delphi process to develop consensus on criteria for academic promotion of surgical educators. For those unfamiliar, the modified Delphi process is a structured method for gathering expert opinions through multiple rounds of surveys and feedback.
In Round 1, the authors recruited senior academic surgeons nationally from the Society of University Surgeons and Society of Surgical Chairs to submit criteria for promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor and Professor. These criteria were reviewed, consolidated into domains, and used to create a survey for Rounds 2 and 3. In Round 2, participants rated each criterion on a 5-point Likert scale from mandatory to unnecessary. Mean ratings were calculated and used to select criteria for Round 3. Round 3 followed the same process, with participants rating the consolidated criteria list. After Round 3, the mean ratings were used to rank the promotion criteria.
The top domains were scholarship, teaching, administration, and mentorship. Scholarship was viewed as foundational. Highly rated criteria for Associate Professor included: 1) Active participation in educational conferences and activities, 2) Developing an educational portfolio, 3) Excellence in clinical teaching at home institution, 4) Local/regional education development and programming. Highly rated criteria for Professor included: 1) Mentoring more junior surgical educators, 2) Ongoing participation in conferences and education activities, 3) National/international reputation for education, 4) Leadership roles in committees focused on education, 5) Record of teaching excellence at multiple trainee levels.
These criteria can inform promotion processes and help guide career development for faculty on education-focused pathways in surgery departments. Key point is the expectation that surgical educators evolve from teacher to scholar to leader, while maintaining early-stage activities.
The detailed criteria identified in this national Delphi study provide valuable guidance for the promotion and career development of faculty pursuing education-focused careers in academic surgery departments. The progression of criteria reflects the evolution of surgical educators from teachers to scholars to leaders over the course of their careers. At the Associate Professor level, excellence in teaching and developing an education portfolio are important. For promotion to Professor, criteria expand to include mentoring other educators, demonstrating national/international impact, and taking on leadership roles. The criteria emphasize that master educators maintain teaching excellence while growing their influence and augmenting this core skill with scholarship activities. The consensus-derived criteria give promotions committees and faculty concrete domains and accomplishments to prioritize. The findings fill a gap by delineating specific markers of educational excellence that can be used to reward and retain surgeon-educators, allowing this key pathway to be more consistently defined across institutions.
