Urology · 2026
The Current State of Urology Residency Mentorship: Insights From the American Urological Association Resident/Fellow Census.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Prieto Javier, Kong Lily, Galen Emily, Meeks William, Moyer Andrea, Han Justin S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine the current state of urology residency mentorship from the trainee viewpoint.
METHODS: The 2022 American Urology Association Annual Resident/Fellow Census included 17 specific questions concerning residency mentorship. These questions provided insight into trainees' experiences, including types of mentorship programs, selection/assignment processes, needs assessments, barriers, satisfaction, and evaluation models. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.
RESULTS: Three hundred sixty responses were collected from the survey (269 residents and 91 fellows). Overall, 22% of urology trainees indicated that they lacked a mentorship program or current mentor. Of those with mentors, 34% of trainees reported informal mentorship (no formal assignment), while 33% reported mentor assignment by program director or chair, and only 23% of trainees self-selected their mentors. The most common areas of mentorship assistance were career planning (82%), obtaining surgical skills (62%), manuscript preparation/support (58%), and research idea generation (57%). The least common areas of support were maintaining wellness (49%) and work-life balance (47%). Only 40% of respondents noted that they evaluated their mentorship programs or mentors, while 85% felt that mentor training would be beneficial to mentors.
CONCLUSION: Although most trainees receive mentorship in their training programs, their experience is largely informal and unstructured. Mentorship primarily focuses on career and academic development, with less than half of trainees noting support with work-life balance. Mentor training may be beneficial for strengthening mentorship programming.
METHODS: The 2022 American Urology Association Annual Resident/Fellow Census included 17 specific questions concerning residency mentorship. These questions provided insight into trainees' experiences, including types of mentorship programs, selection/assignment processes, needs assessments, barriers, satisfaction, and evaluation models. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.
RESULTS: Three hundred sixty responses were collected from the survey (269 residents and 91 fellows). Overall, 22% of urology trainees indicated that they lacked a mentorship program or current mentor. Of those with mentors, 34% of trainees reported informal mentorship (no formal assignment), while 33% reported mentor assignment by program director or chair, and only 23% of trainees self-selected their mentors. The most common areas of mentorship assistance were career planning (82%), obtaining surgical skills (62%), manuscript preparation/support (58%), and research idea generation (57%). The least common areas of support were maintaining wellness (49%) and work-life balance (47%). Only 40% of respondents noted that they evaluated their mentorship programs or mentors, while 85% felt that mentor training would be beneficial to mentors.
CONCLUSION: Although most trainees receive mentorship in their training programs, their experience is largely informal and unstructured. Mentorship primarily focuses on career and academic development, with less than half of trainees noting support with work-life balance. Mentor training may be beneficial for strengthening mentorship programming.