Effective leadership in research and public health is critical to strengthen and use evidence for decision making to bridge the gap between knowledge and delivery of interventions known to save lives and reduce suffering. However, strategies are needed to develop current and future leaders who will address disparities and emerging needs whether due to pandemics, aging populations, climate change, and the growing burden of disease. The current and emerging challenges in the global landscape of public health crises call for a new generation of leaders who can lead the design, implementation, dissemination, and translation of evidence into routine policy and practice in their settings.

Among the leading global health challenges, the burden of non-communicable, chronic diseases including cardiovascular disease pose a threat to the advances made in extending lifespan and reducing morbidity over the last few decades. In Nigeria there is a critical need for locally designed and led research in clinical trials, implementation science and policy development to address disease burden and improve health care delivery (1, 2). This research should empower leaders who can utilize evidence to enact decisions on how to design effective policy and implementation for better prevention, diagnosis, and management of non-communicable, chronic diseases (3).

Culturally responsive and culturally aware mentoring are key elements of mentoring. Developing a culturally responsive approach for public health leadership development through mentoring is a valuable and sustainable strategy to address challenges. This approach empowers mentors with the skills, knowledge and networks necessary to create lasting positive changes. Culturally-aware mentoring (CAM) is an evidence-based initiative to enhance mentors’ ability to effectively address cultural diversity matters in their research mentoring relationships. It involves practices in which mentors recognize their own culturally shaped beliefs, perceptions, and judgments and are cognizant of cultural differences and similarities between themselves and their mentees (4–6). CAM inspires mentors to understand, appreciate, and incorporate the cultural backgrounds, values, and beliefs of their mentees into the mentoring relationship.

Advancing Mentorship to Promote Supportive Research Environments.

The capacity of public health leaders and researchers in many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is still emerging, although capacity building work is underway through training and mentorship (7). This need to mentor researchers in LMIC to reduce inequities has been discussed as a “pivotal part of succession planning in global health” (8). Mentorship is critical to supporting researchers throughout their career, and particularly as the new generation of leaders in research emerges (9, 10). However, the understanding of how mentorship can be made more effective in LMICs is still relatively new. Effective mentoring relationships provide the building blocks for competent leaders to navigate complex dynamics with the flexibility and conscientiousness needed to improve the health of global populations (11). A 2019 report on the Fogarty-funded mentoring workshops focused on training mid and senior-level researchers on tools and techniques of effective mentoring was found to be effective in enhancing skills and capacity in researchers and promoting supportive research environments in LMIC (5, 12).

The Cardiovascular Research Training in Nigeria (CeRTIN) program, a collaboration between the University of Abuja in Nigeria, Northwestern University, and Washington University in St. Louis, was funded by National Institutes of Health Fogarty International Center to increase the research capacity of Nigerian investigators in cardiovascular implementation research, clinical trials, and patient-centered outcomes research. The objectives of the overall program include developing new leaders in research, strengthening mentorship of and by current and future leaders, and building coursework with public health faculty at the University of Abuja. The CeRTIN program investigators recognized the need to develop mentorship capacity in the current and future researchers to ensure they acquire the skills and competencies necessary to mentor junior researchers. In the CeRTIN program, each trainee is assigned a mentor from the University of Abuja or another leading Nigeria academic institution and one or two mentors from the US institutions (triad model). This approach is supported by a commitment to developing and building capacity for current and future mentors in cardiovascular research in the University of Abuja and other institutions in Nigeria.

Short-course training as workshops is a core strategy from the Fogarty International Center and was a key component of the CeRTIN program, including PhD and master’s candidates, post-doctoral fellows, and junior faculty at the University of Abuja. The goals of the short-course approach involved teaching new methodologies and concepts to adult learners to build knowledge, skills, and interest in progressing as researchers and mentors. The short-term mentorship workshop was designed to provide more senior investigators at the University of Abuja and strategic partners with skills and competencies necessary to mentor junior researchers and to develop a research workforce capable of conducting high-impact cardiovascular health research at independent and team levels. The team enacted this core strategy during the first 2 years of the project to teach in the core methodological areas including IS, clinical trials and PCOR as well as mentorship and facilitation. Additional emphasis will be placed on key elements in the mentoring ecosystem including nurturing a culture of institutional mentoring, competency-based frameworks, peer mentoring, cohort learning, and learner-centered pedagogy.

The CeRTIN program’s educational framework was guided by adult learning principles, Bloom’s Taxonomy, and the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model (13–15). The training focused on building the skills and achieving results to enrich mentee and mentor capacity. This focus was on practical skills, collaborative learning, and continuous development that exist at the core of this training program which aims to create confident, competent, and committed mentors who can effectively guide and support their mentees. Practical application and skill development over theoretical lectures were emphasized. Bloom’s Taxonomy was modified for adult training to enable participants to build knowledge and skills, while clarifying what they need to know and why it is important.

The University of Abuja-led workshop was built on an initial two-day workshop held on 25–26 of April 2024. This workshop agenda was co-developed from evidence-based practices in mentorship and an initial mentorship workshop hosted by team members years prior (16). The team expanded mentorship training within the program through the co-creation of the workshop content and format. The process placed emphasis on leveraging cultural wisdom and expertise and adapting existing mentorship tools and principles to reflect the local context and culture. Local examples and leaders emphasized the cultural landscape for academics in Nigeria. The workshop was largely designed to be in person but opportunities to attend the lectures and participate in large group discussions were offered for attendees unable to come in person. A full detailed agenda highlighting workshop topics, duration and sequencing is found in Supplementary Table 4.

The training approach leveraged principles of adult learning by equipping mentors with knowledge and skills that they could readily use to be effective. Instead of focusing on the theoretical aspects, the emphasis was placed on participatory learning approaches, practical application in professional work settings, and knowledge and skill acquisition and development. Key sessions topics are detailed in the agenda (Supplementary Appendix). Example topics included the following: mentoring frameworks & definitions, effective mentoring in local contexts, mentee panel, setting expectations, and elder reflections on mentoring in local contexts. Several key pedagogical strategies were used, including interactive workshops, group discussions, role-playing, and case studies. Used together, the environment focused on active learning, peer learning, and collaboration and fostered community among the mentors and mentees. The active learning focus promoted key mentoring skill-building activities including active listening, effective communication, goal setting, and providing constructive feedback. Mentors and mentees were provided with a toolkit of resources, including templates, guides, and articles to support their practice. The workshop was limited to 2 days because of resource constraints.

Three physician-scientists from the University of Abuja who also serve as mentors and key personnel in the CeRTIN program led the training. Workshop presenters included leaders in mentorship from Nigeria and South Africa as well as current mentors (Nigeria and US) and mentees from the CeRTIN program. In addition, current trainees from CeRTIN participated in the workshop and reflected on their own experiences as mentees and emerging mentors in a panel session.

The Kirkpatrick Model is an internationally recognized tool for evaluating and analyzing the results of educational, training and learning programs (15). It consists of four levels of evaluation: Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results. Areas of the evaluation addressed multiple levels of the Kirkpatrick Framework including Level 1 (Reaction), Level 2 (Learning), and Level 3 (Behavior). Level 1 measures participants’ immediate perceptions and satisfaction with the training. Level 2 measures how well participants acquired the desired knowledge, skills, and confidence in the core domains (communication, constructive feedback, expectations, goal setting, strategy development, independence, & connection). Level 3 assessed participants’ intentions and evidence of knowledge application into practice. Participants completed pre- and post-workshop surveys using Likert scales, knowledge assessments, and open-ended questions.

Data was entered into REDCap managed by the University of Abuja. Descriptive statistics were used for demographics and quantitative responses. A rapid, pragmatic approach guided the thematic analysis of qualitative data, enabling an examination of the dynamic context and systems within the training environment, and informing recommendations for meaningful and actionable improvements (17, 18). To ensure anonymity a participant generated code was used to link the pre and post session surveys. Missing data were excluded.

Our training approach designed to strengthen public health and research leadership to address the growing burden of NCDs in Nigeria highlights the value of culturally responsive approaches to global health leadership development that also include attention to adult learning principles, pedagogy, and evaluation. The key findings from the evaluation provide further details on the success of integrating core practices including cultural responsiveness, culturally aware mentoring, and sharing elder wisdom across continents, cultures, and generations of faculty are core to our approach.

Most participants agreed that the workshop facilitators were sensitive to differences between the mentoring context in Nigeria and the US; 86% remarked that the workshop was relevant to the work and cultural context in Nigeria. This workshop stressed the need to address cultural sensitivity while addressing the unique needs of both parties within the Nigerian context. This we envisage will facilitate stronger relationships, with trust in supportive, inclusive and safe environments. Similar work by Byars-Winston found high value and satisfaction with culturally aware mentor training, reporting gains in personal cultural awareness and cultural skills, and increased intentions and confidence to address cultural diversity in their mentoring (4).

Culturally sensitive mentors and wisdom from elders are key elements of our collective approach. It is essential in Nigeria, where diverse ethnic groups and cultural practices exist, that a culturally sensitive mentor would be aware of this and adapt their communication style accordingly. While the workshop emphasized practical, skill-based learning, several lectures were included as they were led by senior-level, elder members of the community. Cultural leaders as lecturers shared vast mentoring experiences in a culturally sensitive manner, particularly attuned to gender and age. Some cultural values shared were mutual respect, not only for mentors, but persons who are older and more experienced. For example, in Nigeria it is culturally appropriate for older individuals to be addressed using titles and not with first names. A focus on gendered examples from the Nigerian academic context highlighted the need to understand values and beliefs around cultural communication styles. This involved using culturally relevant examples to explain issues and concepts. Specific time was devoted to navigating cultural barriers such as language, enhancing inclusiveness, and providing culturally sensitive feedback (20).

Overall, participants reported that they found the training valuable and impactful; the training equipped them to provide better mentorship and address the mentees’ needs. Mentees reported feelings of confidence and empowerment and appreciated the support and focused guidance on research and leadership skills. The training team learned that culturally responsive mentoring is critical to the success of young scientists of diverse backgrounds (20). Thus, the importance of ongoing support for both the mentors and mentees cannot be overemphasized. Both reiterate the need for continuous training and opportunities to interact and network to strengthen their capabilities. Mentorship programs- whether new or recurring - benefit deeply from formal and well-structured evaluation frameworks and methods (12, 21).

While formal mentorship in low and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions has grown, literature on the evaluation of these programs remains limited (21). Further, few consensus evaluation metrics exist in high-income countries that assess mentorship at institution levels (21). Chi et al.’s recommendation for ongoing, systemic evaluation to monitor progress, programmatic gaps, quality improvement, resource justification, and forecast future directions align with the results of this Nigeria-based work. Specific focus on the stage and maturity of these programs is also important (21). Further attention to various types of formative, summative, process and outcome evaluation frameworks hold potential for understanding the role that various mentorship components play across the globe.

These findings suggest that this approach to mentorship training has the potential to significantly contribute to strengthening the public health research capacity in Nigeria. To ensure widespread adoption and to maximize the impact and sustainability of the programs, the University of Abuja based institution has commenced a mentorship program within the institution in collaboration with the Institute of Advanced Medical Research and Training and the Faculty of Clinical Sciences. It will be crucial to fund and scale up to other institutions and regions in Nigeria. The cross-institutional and cultural team agrees that there is a need to integrate this type of responsive mentorship training into existing public health and other research training programs. Success demands a network and platform for both mentors and mentees to connect, support, and share their program experiences (19, 22, 23).

A policy framework can contribute to long-term program success by acknowledging the importance of investing in future scientists and in research enabling environments. A sustainable mentorship network can also be encouraged by linking those currently mentored with an upward view to gradually step into full mentoring thereby reducing the burden of the limited number of mentors in LMIC (23, 24).

This mentorship program, while exciting and promising, is not without challenges similar to those identified by Rosenberg, et al. (25). Securing adequate funding for future programming is vital for the commencement and sustainability of the program. Finding qualified mentors who are crucial for the program can be difficult because mentors need to have protected time, relevant experience and skills, and a commitment to effectively guide mentees (26, 27). Several assumptions that mentorship must be hierarchical or that mentors may be senior-level may hinder valuable peer mentorship opportunities (10, 28). Further examination of mentorship programs across disciplines, ranks and settings can aid in expanding understandings of the various success and challenge elements.