Beware False Growth Mindset: Building Growth Mindset in Medical Education Is Essential but Complicated.

ABSTRACT: Mindset theory aims to explain how learners' beliefs about intelligence and learning affect how they perceive effort, react to failure, and respond to feedback in challenging learning contexts. Mindset theory distinguishes between growth mindset (the belief that human capacities can be developed over time) and fixed mindset (the belief that human capacities are inherent and unchangeable). Efforts to develop growth mindset in learners have shown a wide range of benefits, including positive effects on students' resilience, commitment to lifelong learning, and persistence in a field of study, with notable impacts on learners who are struggling, learners from minoritized groups, and women in scientific fields. In recent years, mindset theory interventions have caught the interest of medical educators hoping to engage learners as partners in their own learning and progression to competence. Educators hoping to apply this theory to educational programs and learner-teacher interactions in ways that promote growth mindsets would benefit from awareness of the concept of false growth mindset , a term coined by Carol Dweck to refer to common pitfalls in the theory's application. In this article, the authors highlight important findings from mindset interventions in medical education, identify common pitfalls of false growth mindset in the context of medical learners, and offer suggestions for how educators and institutions can better instigate changes to promote growth mindsets within medical education.

The Case for Instructional Teams in the New Era of Online Medical Education.

After a period of "emergency remote teaching" precipitated by COVID-19, academic medical centers are moving into a second, more mature phase in online education. This article offers guidance to institutions planning for this second phase. In it, we advocate a reorientation towards "instructional teams;" outline typical roles and skill sets on instructional teams; discuss the hardware, software, and space required to develop high-quality online courses; and describe common pitfalls experienced by instructional teams along with strategies to avoid them. Our objective is to help institutions hoping to develop high-quality, sustainable online programming to set realistic and informed expectations, allocate resources intelligently, hire appropriately, and work productively.

Time to act: A rubric-based approach for institutionalizing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion.

Attacks on minoritized communities and increasing awareness of the societal causes of health disparities have combined to highlight deep systemic inequities. In response, academic health centers have prioritized justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI) in their strategic goals. To have a sustained impact, JEDI efforts cannot be siloed; rather, they must be woven into the fabric of our work and systematically assessed to promote meaningful outcomes and accountability. To this end, the University of Pittsburgh's Institute for Clinical Research Education assembled a task force to create and apply a rubric to identify short and long-term JEDI goals, assess the current state of JEDI at our Institute, and make recommendations for immediate action. To ensure deep buy-in, we gathered input from diverse members of our academic community, who served on targeted subcommittees. We then applied a three-step process to ensure rapid forward progress. We emerged with concrete actions for priority focus and a plan for ongoing assessment of JEDI institutionalization. We believe our process and rubric offer a scalable and adaptable model for other institutions and departments to follow as we work together across academic medical institutions to put our justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion goals into meaningful action.

Shut Up & Write!® builds writing self-efficacy and self-regulation in early-career researchers.

Introduction: High writing self-efficacy and self-regulation are tied to publication and grant submission. Writers with these attributes are more productive. We investigated whether participating in a Shut Up & Write!®-style intervention (SUAW) would produce statistically significant gains in writing self-efficacy and self-regulation when comparing pre-post-participation surveys. Methods: Forty-seven medical students, TL1/KL2, and early-career faculty from across the USA expressed interest in participating, with 37 completing the pre-survey. We conducted (on Zoom) a 12-week SUAW series and measured the effect using a pre-post survey adapted from the Writer Self-Perception Scale. Paired t-tests (α = 0.05) were conducted on three subscales to test for significant differences between pre- and post-test means. The subscales reflected writing attitudes, writing strategies, and avoiding writing distractions. Subscales showed acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas of 0.80, 0.71, and 0.72, respectively. Results: Twenty-seven participants attended at least one session. Of these, 81% presented as female, and 60% were from NIH-defined Underrepresented Backgrounds and/or were from Minority-Serving Institutions. Twenty-four completed both the pre- and post-surveys. Sixty percent previously participated in an activity similar to SUAW. We found significant improvements in writing attitudes (p = 0.020) and writing strategies (p = 0.041) for those who previously participated. For those who had not previously participated, we found improved writing strategies (p = 0.002). Eighty percent were very satisfied/satisfied with SUAW. Discussion: Researchers have tied writing self-efficacy and self-regulation to timely publication and grant submission. We found significant gains in self-efficacy and self-regulation, suggesting that participation in a SUAW-style intervention may increase writing productivity.

Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success: Results from LEADS alumni.

Purpose: In 2015, the University of Pittsburgh partnered with several Minority Serving Institutions to develop the Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success (LEADS) Program. LEADS was designed to provide skills development, mentoring, and networking support to early career underrepresented faculty. Method: LEADS included three components: skills training (e.g., grant and manuscript writing and team science), mentoring, and networking opportunities. Scholars completed a pre- and post-test survey and an annual alumni survey that included measures on burnout, motivation, leadership, professionalism, mentoring, job and career satisfaction, networking, and an assessment of their research self-efficacy. Results: Scholars demonstrated a significant increase in their research self-efficacy having completed all the modules (t = 6.12; P < 0.001). Collectively, LEADS scholars submitted 73 grants and secured 46 grants for a 63% success rate. Most scholars either agreed or strongly agreed that their mentor was effective in helping to develop their research skills (65%) and provided effective counseling (56%). Scholars did experience increased burnout with 50% feeling burned out at the exit survey (t = 1.42; P = 0.16) and 58% reporting feelings of burnout at the most recent survey in 2020 (t = 3.96; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Our findings support the claim that participation in LEADS enhanced critical research skills, provided networking and mentoring opportunities, and contributed to research productivity for scientists from underrepresented backgrounds.

Reducing tensions and expediting manuscript submission via an authorship agreement for early-career researchers: A pilot study.

Authorship can be a source of tension on research teams, in academic/industry collaborations, and between mentors/mentees. Authorship misconduct is prevalent among biomedical researchers, and disputes about authorship can generate tensions that have the potential to disrupt professional relationships and damage careers. Early-career researchers may experience particular challenges navigating authorship both because of inexperience and power differentials; in effect, they lack the language and confidence to have these conversations and may feel unwilling to challenge the status quo. The authors implemented an Authorship Agreement for use when collaborating on a manuscript and hypothesized that using this agreement would reduce authorship tensions and speed time to manuscript submission by helping early-career investigators manage authorship conversations more effectively. The authors surveyed trainees (n = 65) on the prevalence of authorship-related tensions and compared the results from the first survey in 2017 to the final survey in 2020. The decrease in tensions around meeting deadlines was significant (z = 2.59, p = 0.010). The authors believe the effect of an Authorship Agreement on authorship-related tensions has not previously been investigated. This work extends what is known about the prevalence of commonly cited authorship tensions, and provides evidence of the effectiveness of steps that can be taken to alleviate them.

Evaluation of two longitudinal faculty leadership training programs: behavioral change and institutional impact.

PURPOSE: Building leadership skills among faculty in academic medicine is essential, yet professional development programs focused on leadership are not always attentive to the needs of faculty on diverse career pathways or at differing career stages-nor are they often rigorously assessed. Evaluations commonly focus on participant satisfaction and short-term learning but not behavior change and institutional impact, which are difficult to assess but arguably more meaningful. Given the substantial time and money invested in these programs, more rigorous evaluation is critical. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors evaluated an intensive, shared leadership-focused training program for early-career and mid-career faculty, offered by the University of Pittsburgh's School of Medicine over the course of a year. They administered a pre/post-program assessment of confidence in key skill areas, and conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 participants between 1-4 years after program completion. FINDINGS: Participants in both programs showed statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001) on every item measured in the pre/post-test. Analysis of the interviews revealed indications of substantial behavior change as well as institutional impact. The evaluation also suggested particular benefits for female professionals. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The authors conducted a long-term assessment of leadership training focused on career pathway and career stage and found that it (a) prompted both positive behavioral change and institutional impact and (b) suggested benefits for female faculty in particular, which could potentially help to eliminate gender-based disparities in leadership in academic medical centers.

An Online Training Program to Improve Clinicians' Skills in Communicating About Serious Illness.

BACKGROUND: Large-scale efforts to train clinicians in serious-illness communication skills are needed, but 2 important gaps in knowledge remain. (1) No proven training method exists that can be readily scaled to train thousands of clinicians. (2) Though the value of interprofessional collaboration to support incapacitated patients' surrogates is increasingly recognized, few interventions for training intensive care unit (ICU) nurses in important communication skills can be leveraged to provide interprofessional family support. OBJECTIVE: To develop and test a web/videoconference-based platform to train nurses to communicate about serious illness. METHODS: A user-centered process was used to develop the intervention, including (1) iteratively engaging a stakeholder panel, (2) developing prototype and beta versions of the platform, and (3) 3 rounds of user testing with 13 ICU nurses. Participants' ratings of usability, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness were assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. RESULTS: Stakeholders stressed that the intervention should leverage interactive learning and a streamlined digital interface. A training platform was developed consisting of 6 interactive online training lessons and 3 group-based video-conference practice sessions. Participants rated the program as usable (mean summary score 84 [96th percentile]), acceptable (mean, 4.5/5; SD, 0.7), and effective (mean, 4.8/5; SD, 0.6). Ten of 13 nurses would recommend the intervention over 2-day in-person training. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses testing this web-based training program judged it usable, acceptable, and effective. These data support proceeding with an appropriately powered efficacy trial.

Translating the learning sciences into practice: A primer for clinical and translational educators.

The learning sciences have yielded a wealth of insights about the mechanisms and conditions that promote learning, yet the findings from this body of research often do not make their way into educational practice. This fundamentally translational problem is one we believe that educators from translational fields, with their evidence-based orientation and familiarity with the challenges and importance of translation, are well-positioned to address. Here, we provide a primer on the learning sciences to guide educators in the Clinical and Translational Science Institutes and other organizations that train translational researchers. We (a) describe the unique teaching and learning environment in which this training occurs, and why it necessitates attention to learning research and its appropriate application, (b) explain what the learning sciences are, (c) distill the complex science of learning into core principles, (d) situate recent developments in the field within these principles, and (e) explain, in practical terms, how these principles can inform our teaching.

Leveraging Technology to Overcome the "Scalability Problem" in Communication Skills Training Courses.

Although multiple consensus statements have called for large-scale efforts to improve clinicians' communication skills regarding a variety of difficult conversations in medicine, this goal will be difficult to attain because there are no readily scalable, validated communication skills training programs for clinicians. However, novel applications of existing technologies and approaches grounded in learning science can overcome the scalability barriers. Moreover, future advances in virtual reality and artificial intelligence are likely to greatly enhance the possibilities for communication skills training programs. The purpose of this paper is to propose a scalable, theoretically grounded method to train clinicians in advanced communication skills in medicine. First, we summarize four key principles of adult learning relevant to communication skills training in medicine. Second, we discuss recommended practices to design effective technology-enhanced educational interventions, with an emphasis on achieving high amounts of user engagement. Third, we synthesize these principles into a framework for a web- and videoconference-based platform for teaching advanced communication skills in medicine. Once developed, this low-cost, scalable training platform has the potential to allow thousands of clinicians to acquire the advanced communication skills needed for difficult conversations in medicine.

Assessing the application of human-centered design to translational research.

INTRODUCTION: Human-centered design (HCD) training offers the potential to improve both team processes and products. However, the use of HCD to improve the quality of team science is a relatively recent application, and its benefits and challenges have not been rigorously evaluated. We conducted a qualitative study with health sciences researchers trained in HCD methods. We aimed to determine how researchers applied HCD methods and perceived the benefits and barriers to using HCD on research teams. METHODS: We conducted 1-hour, semi-structured interviews with trainees from three training cohorts. Interviews focused on perceptions of the training, subsequent uses of HCD, barriers and facilitators, and perceptions of the utility of HCD to science teams. Data analysis was conducted using Braun and Clarke's process for thematic analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed nine faculty and nine staff trained in HCD methods and identified four themes encompassing HCD use, benefits, challenges, and tensions between HCD approaches and academic culture. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees found HCD relevant to research teams for stakeholder engagement, research design, project planning, meeting facilitation, and team management. They also described benefits of HCD in five distinct areas: creativity, egalitarianism, structure, efficiency, and visibility. Our data suggest that HCD has the potential to help researchers work more inclusively and collaboratively on interdisciplinary teams and generate more innovative and impactful science. The application of HCD methods is not without challenges; however, we believe these challenges can be overcome with institutional investment.

Delivering What We PROMISED: Outcomes of a Coaching and Leadership Fellowship for Mentors of Underrepresented Mentees.

Research demonstrates that mentorship can significantly improve career success, career satisfaction, and persistence for underrepresented (UR) minority faculty. However, many UR faculty members do not receive the mentorship they need, nor do mentors always possess the range of skills required to guide UR mentees through the unique challenges they face. We developed a 1-year fellowship training program, PROMISED, designed to help mentors promote career self-authorship and leadership among their UR mentees. PROMISED fellows participated in a two-day in-person training to develop career coaching skills, followed by a series of one-month leadership training/mentoring modules. We assessed mentors' skills at the start and completion of the program. We found that PROMISED fellows reported an increase in perceived skill level in nearly every training topic, with "addressing diversity" demonstrating the most significant change. These results provide evidence that career coaching and leadership training offer an effective supplement to traditional mentor training and that mentors can incorporate these skills effectively into their mentoring practice. Taken together, we believe our data suggest that a program designed to train mentors in coaching and leadership can enhance career satisfaction, persistence, and retention of their UR mentees.

Caregiver Decision-making in Pediatric Intestinal Failure: A Qualitative Study Focused on Iron Deficiency Anemia.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers of children with intestinal failure (IF) face difficult decisions without a clear best alternative. Providers assist in decision-making but often lack knowledge of caregiver perspectives. Using decision-making around anemia treatment as a focal point, we explored how caregivers of children with IF prefer to make decisions. Our goal was to offer insight to guide providers as they assist in decision-making. METHODS: We conducted 12 half-hour semistructured interviews with parents of children with IF. Interview questions addressed general decision-making and specifics of iron supplementation, including key factors and stakeholders in decision-making. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Two investigators coded the transcripts and inductively derived themes. RESULTS: Four themes were identified regarding decision-making. They involved the search for reliable, accurate, and positive information; the role of caretakers on the medical team; the relationships between caretakers and the medical team; and effective communication. Themes around anemia treatment included: identification of anemia by bloodwork; proactive supplementation; individualized regimens; prioritizing safety and convenience. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding caregiver perspectives regarding anemia treatment in pediatric IF identifies opportunities for systematic quality improvement.

NephroTalk Multimodal Conservative Care Curriculum for Nephrology Fellows.

Conservative care, a comprehensive treatment path for advanced kidney disease most suitable for individuals unlikely to benefit from dialysis, is underutilized in the United States. One reason is an absence of robust education about this approach and how to discuss it with potential candidates. To address this need, we developed a multimodal conservative care curriculum for nephrology fellows. This curriculum consists of four online modules that address essential concepts and communication skills related to conservative care. It is followed by an in-person, interactive, "flipped classroom" session facilitated by designated nephrology educators at participating Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education nephrology training programs. Curriculum effect was assessed using surveys completed by participating fellows immediately before and following the curriculum and for participating nephrology educators following flipped classroom teaching; 148 nephrology trainees from 19 programs participated, with 108 completing both pre- and postcurriculum surveys. Mean self-reported preparedness (measured on a five-point Likert scale) increased significantly for all ten concepts taught in the curriculum. The mean correct score on eight knowledge questions increased from 69% to 82% following the curriculum (P<0.001). Fellows rated the curriculum highly and reported that they plan to practice skills learned. For the 19 nephrology program educators, the mean perceived preparedness to teach all curriculum domains increased after, compared with before, facilitating the flipped classroom, reaching significance for seven of the ten concepts measured. Data suggest that fellows' participation in a multimodal curriculum increased knowledge and preparation for fundamental conservative care concepts and communication skills. Fellows rated the curriculum highly. Educator participation appears to have increased preparedness for teaching the curriculum concepts, making it likely that future education in conservative care will become more widespread. Herein, we describe the curriculum content, which we have made publicly available in order to encourage broader implementation, and its effect on participating fellows and the nephrology educators who facilitated it.

Optimizing Synchronous Online Teaching Sessions: A Guide to the "New Normal" in Medical Education.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the medical education community was forced to transition to the virtual space seemingly overnight, with little time to prepare. As such, many medical educators are actively seeking ways to improve delivery of online content and utilize features of different technologies. This View from the APPD, informed by existing literature and author experience, was created to guide medical teachers in their transition to hosting synchronous learning sessions in the virtual space. We hope to empower medical educators with the confidence and skills needed to teach effectively from a distance.

Authorship stories panel discussion: Fostering ethical authorship by cultivating a growth mindset.

Because peer review publication is essential for academic advancement across scientific fields, when authorship is wrongly attributed the consequences can be profound, particularly for junior researchers who are still establishing their professional norms and scientific reputations. Professional societies have published guidelines for authorship, yet authorship dilemmas frequently arise and have harmful consequences for scientific careers. Researchers have noted the complexities of authorship and called for new mechanisms to foster more ethical research cultures within institutions. To address this call, we organized a panel discussion at the Institute for Clinical Research Education at the University of Pittsburgh in which senior faculty members from diverse backgrounds and professional disciplines discussed their own authorship challenges (e.g., renegotiating author order, reconciling inter-professional authorship norms, managing coauthor power differentials) and offered strategies to avoid and/or resolve them. Informed by growth mind-set theory, our storytelling format facilitated an open exchange between senior and junior researchers, situated authorship dilemmas in specific contexts and career stages, and taught researchers how to address authorship challenges not adequately informed by guideline recommendations. Though not empirically assessed, we believe this approach represents a simple, low-cost, and replicable way to cultivate ethical and transparent authorship practices among researchers across scientific fields.

Developing a team science workshop for early-career investigators.

INTRODUCTION: High impact biomedical research is increasingly conducted by large, transdisciplinary, multisite teams in an increasingly collaborative environment. Thriving in this environment requires robust teamwork skills, which are not acquired automatically in the course of traditional scientific education. Team science skills training does exist, but most is directed at clinical care teams, not research teams, and little is focused on the specific training needs of early-career investigators, whose early team leadership experiences may shape their career trajectories positively or negatively. Our research indicated a need for team science training designed specifically for early-career investigators. METHODS: To address this need, we designed and delivered a 2-day workshop focused on teaching team science skills to early-career investigators. We operationalized team science competencies, sought the advice of team science experts, and performed a needs assessment composed of a survey and a qualitative study. Through these multiple approaches, we identified and grouped training priorities into three broad training areas and developed four robust, hands-on workshop sessions. RESULTS: Attendees comprised 30 pre- and post-doc fellows (TL1) and early-career faculty (KL2 and K12). We assessed impact with a pre- and post-workshop survey adapted from the Team Skills Scale. Results from the pre- and post-test Wilcoxon signed-rank analysis (n = 25) showed statistically significant improvement in team science skills and confidence. Open-ended responses indicated that the workshop focus was appropriate and well targeted to the trainees' needs. CONCLUSIONS: Although team science education is still very much in its infancy, these results suggest that training targeted to early-career investigators improves team skills and may foster improved collaboration.

Developing a Training Program to Diversify the Biomedical Research Workforce.

The National Institutes of Health has made considerable investments to diversify the biomedical research workforce. Towards this goal, the authors partnered with representatives from several minority-serving institutions (MSIs) to develop training for the next generation of researchers. To ensure the most effective training program, the authors conducted a needs assessment with junior and senior investigators from the partnering MSIs. In 2016, the authors conducted focus groups and interviews with 23 junior investigators as well as in-depth interviews with 6 senior investigators from the partnering institutions with the goal of identifying specific areas of training and support that would help junior investigators at MSIs develop and sustain research careers. The data were transcribed and coded, and thematic analysis was conducted. The authors determined four areas in which training and support were needed: training in the "informal curriculum" (skills not covered in traditional clinical research courses), protected time for research training, opportunities to create career-advancing work products, and networking opportunities. The themes that were identified informed the development of the LEADS (Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success) program. The program consists of 10 instructor-led online modules each lasting approximately one month in duration with weekly synchronous sessions. Scholars are expected to be able to devote at least 20% of their time to the program.