Formalized Mentorship in Radiation Oncology: Bridging Existing Gaps in Mentorship

Purpose/Objective(s): The American College of Radiation Oncology (ACRO) Resident Committee offers a mentorship program to medical students, residents, and new practitioners. This program provides a unique opportunity to develop formal mentorship on a national level to bridge existing mentorship gaps. This abstract examined the perceived benefits of a formal mentorship program. Materials/Methods: All applicants provided demographic information and specific mentorship need requests. Pairings occurred periodically based on a personalized pairing process. This year, due to COVID-19, all sessions were held virtually. A questionnaire was designed in Google Forms based on the Society for Women in Radiation Oncology (SWRO) annual survey to evaluate the mentorship program. Data were collected and analysis was conducted using JMP version 15(SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC). Results: Since June 2020, 78 individuals enrolled: 28 to become a mentor, 38 to become a mentee;12 were interested in both. The mentor group consisted of radiation oncology residents (47.5%), academic faculty (40%) and private practice physicians (12.5%). 57.5% of the mentors were males and 4% associated with the LGBTQI+ community. Geographic distribution of mentors: 40% Midwest, 27.5% South/Southeast, 15% Northeast, 12.5% West Coast and 5% international. Among resident mentors, 58% were Junior (PGY1-3) and 42% were senior (PGY4-5) residents. Among mentees, 50% were residents, followed by medical students (46%) and new practitioners (4%). There were equal number of males and females. The geographic distribution was: 32% Midwest, 22% South/Southeast, 36% Northeast, 2% West Coast, and 8% international. The distribution across residency training years was: 57% Junior (PGY1-3) and 43% Senior (PGY4-5). The survey was sent out in January 2021 and we currently have 29/78, 37% response rate. This survey showed the most common method of communication was email (59%), followed by video call (52%) and phone (48%). 62% had at least 2 interactions since being paired. Both parties set up the interactions in 59% of pairs, followed by mentees being responsible in 24%. Mentors reported experiencing mutual respect (94%), a personal connection (67%), clear expectations (44%), and shared values (44%). Mentees similarly reported mutual respect (94%), shared values (76%), a personal connection (59%) and clear expectations (47%). 96% had mentor/mentee relationship outside ACRO program;however, 62% felt that a formal program is more beneficial than informal opportunities. Conclusion: The results of our mentorship program highlight the continued interest and need for formal radiation oncology mentorship programs. The major strength of the program has been the high rates of interaction which is based on mutual respect, shared values and personal connection. Areas of future focus includes recruiting more new practitioners and private practice radiation oncologists to help enrich and diversify the mentorship program.