Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mixed-methods design revealed mentees' positive experiences and valuable STEM learning in biomechanics.
This study implemented a mixed-method design (postprogram survey and structured interviews) to develop a detailed understanding of mentee experiences in the Biomechanics Research and Innovation Challenge. Forty-nine mentees completed the postprogram survey, and 26 mentees participated in the interview. Based on the survey results, 65% of mentees enjoyed the university campus experience, and 63% valued the networking opportunities. Learning about the research process and different careers in science and biomechanics were appreciated by 63% and 61%, respectively. Over 90% of mentees responded positively to statements about their mentors’ suitability for the Biomechanics Research and Innovation Challenge, supportiveness, and availability, and 85% of mentees would recommend the program to their peers. The interviews revealed 4 key themes: developing Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) skills; discovering biomechanics; STEM role models; and facilitators and barriers to participation. Furthermore, the interviews highlighted the development of essential STEM skills, exposure to biomechanics, and the positive impact of mentors. The program’s hands-on and collaborative nature facilitated participation, whereas communication tools and scheduling were barriers. Our findings highlight the positive mentee experiences related to participation in the Biomechanics Research and Innovation Challenge program, enabling them to develop STEM skills and discover the diverse field of biomechanics. Overall, the program was well received and recommended by participants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kean et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: