9008 Background: Hematology/Oncology (H/O) fellows have diverse career opportunities post-graduation. Many fellowship programs have created specialized training pathways for trainees to support career-aligned skill development, defined here as professional development pathways (PDPs). These may include specific training for careers in laboratory/translational research, medical education, and quality improvement. There is limited data regarding utilization and perception of PDPs in H/O fellowship programs. Methods: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of United States (US) H/O fellowship program leaders (PLs) to assess: (1) prevalence of PDPs, (2) perceived value of PDPs, and (3) barriers to implementation. The survey underwent content validation by three experts – program directors (PDs) in different fellowship subspecialties – who reviewed the instrument for clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness. The survey was distributed electronically to 180 US H/O fellowship programs; responses were anonymous. Results: 72 responding PLs completed the survey (40% response rate). Program size ranged from 2 to 16 fellows per year. Programs from all US geographic regions were represented; 78% were affiliated with academic hospitals and 17% with academically affiliated community hospitals. Less than half (45%) report offering PDPs. The majority (78%) of PLs agree/strongly agree that PDPs provide fellows with more focused career-concordant training. Among the 32 programs with PDPs, 84% report PDPs align with fellows’ post-graduation careers. Most (66%) have fellows select their PDP during the first year of fellowship; PDP selection is mandatory in 56%. Eleven distinct PDPs were described, most commonly clinical research (84%), clinical practice (69%), and basic science research (63%). Core PDP components include clinical experiences (100%), scholarly projects (88%), and structured mentorship (82%). Among the 40 programs without PDPs, 63% perceive value in adding them. Reported barriers include difficulty integrating PDPs into current fellowship structure (60%), lack of appropriate faculty mentors (55%), and lack of PD bandwidth (53%). Resources identified that would support implementation include dedicated time or support for mentorship (68%), sample curricular or implementation tools (68%), access to non-clinical infrastructure (e.g. research, quality improvement, education) (63%), and funding (45%). Conclusions: While most US H/O fellowship PLs view PDPs as valuable for trainee career development, less than half of responding programs currently use them. Addressing institutional and programmatic barriers and providing curricular resources, dedicated time for faculty mentors, and funding may enable wider implementation. Future studies should explore existing PDP structures and define best practices for PDP utilization.
O’Loughlin et al. (Thu,) studied this question.