Are we doing it right? Mentorship challenges for oncology fellows and early-career faculty from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine.

Abstract

11047 Background: Physician workforce diversity can be a driver of institutional excellence, improving innovation and reducing health disparities. The current diversity of the hematology/oncology (HO) workforce does not reflect that of the US population. The role of mentorship in increasing HO fellows’ interest in pursuing careers in HO has been described previously. However, the mentorship experiences of fellows and early career faculty from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine (UIM) in HO has not been fully characterized. Therefore, we compared the mentorship experiences of UIM and non-UIM trainees and early career faculty in HO subspecialties. Methods: We conducted cross-sectional online survey of HO subspecialists including current fellows and faculty within 5 years of end of training. The anonymous survey was distributed via email and social media channels in April 2020. Fisher’s exact test and multivariable logistic regression models were used to conduct comparisons between study groups. Results: Of the 306 respondents, 64 (21%) were UIM and 161 (53%) identified as male. UIM participants were less likely to have a primary mentor (66%) than non-UIM participants (80%, p = 0.015). Among those who had a primary mentor, UIMs were more likely to meet infrequently (greater than every 3 months, p = 0.007). Furthermore, UIMs were more likely to report having mentors outside their own institution (47% vs 40% non-UIM, p = 0.002) and making compromises to gain access to mentorship (36% vs 23% non-UIM, p = < 0.001). In addition, UIM participants were less likely to have an advisor (38% vs 54% non-UIM, p = 0.017), a coach (13% vs 20% non-UIM, p = 0.054), or a sponsor (19% vs 26% non-UIM, p = 0.046). UIMs were also less likely to apply for grants (34% vs 42% non-UIM, p = 0.035) and awards (28% vs 43%, non-UIM p = 0.019). In multivariable models, UIM individuals were more likely to make compromises to gain access to mentors (OR = 1.96, p = 0.047) and this remained significant for females (OR = 2.17, p = 0.005). Lastly, US born individuals had higher odds of having a primary mentor than non-US-born individuals (OR = 2.43, p = 0.004). Conclusions: In the largest study to date characterizing the mentorship experience of HO trainees and junior faculty, we found that UIM individuals were significantly less likely to find effective mentorship and were less likely to apply for awards and grant support. Understanding the challenges of UIM trainees can help shape training environments in academic medicine to ensure these are grounded in diversity and inclusion. Given the importance of workforce diversity, training programs in HO must consider structured programs and other innovations to improve mentoring experiences of UIM trainees and junior faculty.