Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28859683›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

Psychosocial and career outcomes of peer mentorship in medical resident education: a systematic review protocol.

Helen Pethrick, Lorelli Nowell, Elizabeth Oddone Paolucci, Liza Lorenzetti, Michele Jacobsen, Tracey Clancy, Diane L Lorenzetti

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Mapping the Mentorship Landscape in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Training Programs: A Cross-Canadian Survey.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Mentorship Programs in Residency: A Scoping Review.Journal of graduate medical education · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Peer mentoring for professional and personal growth in academic medicine.Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Helen PethrickDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Lorelli NowellFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Elizabeth Oddone PaolucciDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Liza LorenzettiFaculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Michele JacobsenWerklund School of Education, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Tracey ClancyFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Diane L LorenzettiDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4Z6, Canada. dllorenz@ucalgary.ca.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany medical residents lack ready access to social and emotional supports that enable them to successfully cope with the challenges associated with medical residency. This absence of support has been shown to lead to high levels of burnout, decreased mental wellbeing, and difficulty mastering professional competencies in this population. While there is emerging evidence that peer mentoring can be an important source of psychosocial and career-related support for many individuals, the extent of the evidence regarding the benefits of peer mentorship in medical residency education has not yet been established. We describe a protocol for a systematic review to assess the effects of peer mentoring on medical residents' mental wellbeing, social connectedness, and professional competencies.

methodsStudies included in this review will be those that report on peer-mentoring relationships among medical residents. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies will be eligible for inclusion. No date or language limits will be applied. We will search EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, Education Research Complete, and Academic Research Complete databases to identify relevant studies. Two authors will independently assess all abstracts and full-text studies for inclusion and study quality and extract study data in duplicate. DISCUSSION: This is the first systematic review to explicitly explore the role of peer mentoring in the context of medical residency education. We anticipate that the findings from this review will raise awareness of the benefits and challenges associated with peer-mentoring relationships, further the development and implementation of formal peer-mentoring programs for medical residents, and, through identifying gaps in the existing literature, inform future research efforts. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has not been registered in PROSPERO or any other publicly accessible registry.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceEducation, Medical, GraduateInternship and ResidencyPeer GroupHumansMentorsSystematic Reviews as TopicBurnoutMedical educationMedical residentsMental wellbeingMentorshipPeer mentorsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28859683
PMCPMC5579942
OpenAlexW2752810790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.