ArticleClinical and translational science2015
Mentoring in Clinical-Translational Research: A Study of Participants in Master's Degree Programs.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- International online mentorship for translational researchers.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on the Research Career Advancement of Health Equity Scholars from Diverse Backgrounds.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Research projects in translational science are increasingly complex and require interdisciplinary collaborations. In the context of training translational researchers, this suggests that multiple mentors may be needed in different content areas. This study explored mentoring structure as it relates to perceived mentoring effectiveness and other characteristics of master's-level trainees in clinical-translational research training programs. A cross-sectional online survey of recent graduates of clinical research master's program was conducted. Of 73 surveys distributed, 56.2% (n = 41) complete responses were analyzed. Trainees were overwhelmingly positive about participation in their master's programs and the impact it had on their professional development. Overall the majority (≥75%) of trainees perceived they had effective mentoring in terms of developing skills needed for conducting clinical-translational research. Fewer trainees perceived effective mentoring in career development and work-life balance. In all 15 areas of mentoring effectiveness assessed, higher rates of perceived mentor effectiveness was seen among trainees with ≥2 mentors compared to those with solo mentoring (SM). In addition, trainees with ≥2 mentors perceived having effective mentoring in more mentoring aspects (median: 14.0; IQR: 12.0-15.0) than trainees with SM (median: 10.5; IQR: 8.0-14.5). Results from this survey suggest having ≥2 mentors may be beneficial in fulfilling trainee expectations for mentoring in clinical-translational training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.