We are piloting two programs this year: 1) a mentorship program for authors, 2) a mentorship program for reviewers.

Submission Mentorship Program

The aim of the Submission Mentorship Program is to pair-up less experienced authors with senior researchers that can provide feedback on their submission to the workshop, with the overall goal of improving submission quality and fostering future collaboration and mentorship. If you would like to be involved, please apply using one of the following forms.

Application forms

• Application form for mentees: https://forms.gle/rJXPZLP6VaAYWBCj9
  • Eligibility for mentees: 0-1 previous accepted papers in conference proceedings
• Application form for mentors: https://forms.gle/Mr3Q466RSEHe3yEu5
  • Eligibility for mentors: 2+ accepted papers in conference proceedings

Application deadline

The deadline for mentors and mentees to fill in the corresponding application form is Sept 14th. The mentees will be paired up with mentors by Sept 15th.

Expectations

Mentees

Mentees are expected to initiate contact with the assigned mentor and send a submittable draft of the paper/extended abstract to the mentor at least 2 weeks before the submission deadline. Moreover, the mentees are expected to take into account the feedback from the mentors and make a submission to the workshop by the Oct 2nd deadline.

Mentors

Mentors are expected to provide feedback on the draft received from the mentees at least 1 week before the submission deadline. We expect mentors to commit at least 4-5 hours for the mentorship program.

Joint expectations

• We strongly encourage the mentors and mentees to have at least two video or audio calls before the submission deadline:
  • An initial call where the mentor and mentee discuss the core idea of the submission, relevant related work, and how it fits within the machine learning for health application. We also encourage the mentee to highlight what kind of feedback they would find most valuable on their submission draft (e.g. feedback on the presentation, technical details, evaluation set-up, etc.).
  • A subsequent call where the mentor delivers the feedback on the submission draft sent by the mentee. We will provide the mentors with a list of suggestions for feedback that could improve the submission of the mentee.

Both the mentor and mentee are also strongly encouraged to examine the following document about how to write an excellent ML4H paper or extended abstract: https://ml4health.github.io/2020/pages/writing-guidelines.html. This document will also be used to communicate to reviewers what features of submissions are most important to the ML4H venue.

Additional resources and guidelines will be provided to the mentors and mentees after the pairing up has been completed. If you have any questions, please contact ioana.bica@eng.ox.ac.uk.

Timeline

• September 11th: deadline for applying to be a mentor/mentee.
• September 14th: information about mentor-mentee pair-ups will be sent out.
• September 14th - 18th: mentee contacts the assigned mentor to arrange an initial call to discuss the core idea of the submission.
• September 18th: deadline for mentee to send submission draft to mentor.
• September 25th: deadline for mentor to send and discuss feedback with mentee in a subsequent call.

Reviewer Mentorship Program

The purpose of the reviewer mentorship program is to train junior reviewers, foster new connections and relationships in the ML4H community, and ultimately improve the quality of the review process.

Expectations

Mentees

Mentees are expected to share the PDFs of their assigned papers at the beginning of the review period and to share drafts of their reviews at least one week prior to the end of the review period (by October 9) so that there is time for revision following discussion with their mentor. Mentees are expected to meet with their mentor over a video call to discuss the papers and receive feedback on their reviews. Mentees are expected to update their reviews and share final versions with their mentor prior to submission

Mentors

Mentors are expected to read the papers and the reviews that their mentee shares with them. Mentors are expected to provide thoughtful and constructive feedback on the reviews that their mentee shares with them. The provided feedback is expected to assess the scientific validity of the reviews and whether they adhere to the reviewer guidelines and best practices.

Joint Expectations

Mentors and mentees are expected to jointly agree upon a date and time to meet to discuss the reviews on or before October 14. Both members are expected to be timely, thorough, and constructive in their reviews and feedback.

Timeline

• Before the review period (Before October 2)
  • Mentors are matched with mentees
  • Mentors and mentees jointly set a time to have a video call (or audio call if not possible) on or before October 14
• Review period (Oct 2-16)
  • Beginning of review period (October 2): Mentee shares papers with mentor.
  • On or before October 9: Mentee shares review drafts with mentor
  • Scheduled video call (or audio call if not possible) where mentor delivers review feedback
• End of review period (October 16): Mentee submits revised reviews
• After review period
  • Mentors and mentees respond to a survey on the effectiveness of the program

If you have any questions, please contact spfohl@stanford.edu.