Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization-A Leadership Intervention for Women in Academic Medicine.

Christina M Cutter, Rochelle D Jones, Nancy D Spector, Kanakadurga Singer, Kelly C Paradis, Dana A Telem, Eve A Kerr, Eva L Feldman, Abigail J Stewart, Isis H Settles, Peter A Ubel, Susan M Pollart, Harriet W Hopf, Kent A Griffith, Nina A Bickell, Ann Brown, Linda A DiMeglio, Colleen T Fogarty, Nisha Garg, Sheryl L Heron, Richelle J Koopman, Martha McGrew, Karin Muraszko, Elizabeth M Petty, Aina Puce, Anne L Taylor, Lisa Tedesco, Sharon Turner, Pamela M Williams, Reshma Jagsi
{"title":"Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization-A Leadership Intervention for Women in Academic Medicine.","authors":"Christina M Cutter, Rochelle D Jones, Nancy D Spector, Kanakadurga Singer, Kelly C Paradis, Dana A Telem, Eve A Kerr, Eva L Feldman, Abigail J Stewart, Isis H Settles, Peter A Ubel, Susan M Pollart, Harriet W Hopf, Kent A Griffith, Nina A Bickell, Ann Brown, Linda A DiMeglio, Colleen T Fogarty, Nisha Garg, Sheryl L Heron, Richelle J Koopman, Martha McGrew, Karin Muraszko, Elizabeth M Petty, Aina Puce, Anne L Taylor, Lisa Tedesco, Sharon Turner, Pamela M Williams, Reshma Jagsi","doi":"10.1177/15409996251369457","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> The underrepresentation of women in senior positions persists in academic medicine. Data-driven strategies are needed to catalyze advancement. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We designed a novel, National Institutes of Health-funded intervention-Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization (EMPOWER) to be evaluated in a randomized study. This educational innovation was modeled on the Leadership Learning Model Framework developed for the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM)® program and integrated existing research and multidisciplinary content expertise. EMPOWER strives to support the career advancement of women faculty by cultivating fundamental leadership competencies implemented within a peer mentorship framework. Early outcomes surrounding perceptions, feasibility, as well as engagement are described. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We share the EMPOWER curriculum implemented among a national cohort of women clinician-scientists within a broader randomized trial design; 94 consenting participants were assigned to the intervention. Many participants (68%; <i>n</i> = 54) found EMPOWER valuable or very valuable for their personal or career development. It was easy or very easy for 79% (<i>n</i> = 63) of participants to access the online educational materials, and 61% (<i>n</i> = 49) attended all or almost all of the peer circle meetings. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We describe EMPOWER, a novel, potentially scalable, virtual intervention, to address the unmet needs of women faculty in academic medicine at the pivotal transition to leadership. The EMPOWER intervention was feasible, and we report early lessons learned from its development. Future evaluation will include qualitative analyses and comparison of outcomes between program participants and control subjects.</p>","PeriodicalId":520699,"journal":{"name":"Journal of women's health (2002)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of women's health (2002)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15409996251369457","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The underrepresentation of women in senior positions persists in academic medicine. Data-driven strategies are needed to catalyze advancement. Methods: We designed a novel, National Institutes of Health-funded intervention-Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization (EMPOWER) to be evaluated in a randomized study. This educational innovation was modeled on the Leadership Learning Model Framework developed for the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM)® program and integrated existing research and multidisciplinary content expertise. EMPOWER strives to support the career advancement of women faculty by cultivating fundamental leadership competencies implemented within a peer mentorship framework. Early outcomes surrounding perceptions, feasibility, as well as engagement are described. Results: We share the EMPOWER curriculum implemented among a national cohort of women clinician-scientists within a broader randomized trial design; 94 consenting participants were assigned to the intervention. Many participants (68%; n = 54) found EMPOWER valuable or very valuable for their personal or career development. It was easy or very easy for 79% (n = 63) of participants to access the online educational materials, and 61% (n = 49) attended all or almost all of the peer circle meetings. Conclusions: We describe EMPOWER, a novel, potentially scalable, virtual intervention, to address the unmet needs of women faculty in academic medicine at the pivotal transition to leadership. The EMPOWER intervention was feasible, and we report early lessons learned from its development. Future evaluation will include qualitative analyses and comparison of outcomes between program participants and control subjects.

参与同伴导师的机会,福祉,和平等的实现-领导干预妇女在学术医学。
背景:在学术医学领域,女性在高级职位上的代表性不足。需要数据驱动的战略来促进进步。方法:我们设计了一项新颖的、由美国国立卫生研究院资助的干预措施——参与同伴导师促进机会、幸福和公平实现(EMPOWER),并在一项随机研究中进行评估。这一教育创新是基于为学术医学行政领导(ELAM)®项目开发的领导力学习模型框架,并整合了现有研究和多学科内容专业知识。EMPOWER致力于通过培养在同侪指导框架内实施的基本领导能力来支持女性教师的职业发展。描述了围绕感知、可行性和参与度的早期结果。结果:我们在一项更广泛的随机试验设计中,在全国女性临床医生科学家队列中实施了EMPOWER课程;94名同意的参与者被分配到干预中。许多参与者(68%;n = 54)认为EMPOWER对他们的个人或职业发展有价值或非常有价值。79% (n = 63)的参与者很容易或非常容易访问在线教育材料,61% (n = 49)参加了所有或几乎所有的同行圈会议。结论:我们描述了EMPOWER,一个新颖的,潜在的可扩展的虚拟干预,以解决学术医学中女性教师在向领导的关键过渡中未满足的需求。赋权干预措施是可行的,我们报告了从其发展中吸取的早期经验教训。未来的评估将包括定性分析和比较项目参与者和对照受试者之间的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信