Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31037545›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2019

Mentorship of Women in Academic Medicine: a Systematic Review.

Amy H Farkas, Eliana Bonifacino, Rose Turner, Sarah A Tilstra, Jennifer A Corbelli

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 115 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
115citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
45.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

115 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 281 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Understanding the impact of gender during gastroenterology postgraduate medical training.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. The Importance of Mentorship in Career Development.The American journal of pathology · 2025
    Review

55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amy H FarkasDivision of General Internal Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA. ahfarkas@mcw.edu.
Eliana BonifacinoDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Rose TurnerFalk Library of the Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sarah A TilstraDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jennifer A CorbelliDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · USMedical College of Wisconsin · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen remain underrepresented in academic medicine, particularly in leadership positions. This lack of women in leadership has been shown to have negative implications for both patient care and educational outcomes. Similarly, the literature demonstrates that female physicians are less likely to have mentors, despite the proven benefits of mentorship for career advancement. The objective of this review is to identify and describe models of mentorship for women in academic medicine.

methodsWe searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews following PRISMA guidelines in June 2017. We included original English language studies that described a mentorship program in the USA that involved academic medical doctorates and that were created for women or provided results stratified by gender.

resultsOur search returned 3625 results; 3309 references remained after removal of duplicates. Twenty articles met inclusion criteria. The majority of the programs were designed for junior faculty and used the dyad model of mentoring (i.e., one mentor/one mentee). Frequently cited objectives of these programs were to improve scholarship, promotion, and retention of female faculty. Program evaluations were primarily survey-based, with participant-reported satisfaction being the most frequent measured outcome. Most results showed very high satisfaction. Gender concordance between mentor and mentee did not impact satisfaction. Eight articles reported objective outcomes, including publications, retention, and promotion, and each of these demonstrated an improvement after program implementation. DISCUSSION: Our review suggests that mentorship programs designed for women, regardless of the model, are met with high satisfaction and can help promote and retain women in academic medicine. No clear best practices for mentorship emerged in the literature. Institutions, therefore, can individualize their mentorship programs and models to available resources and goals. These results demonstrate the importance of more widespread implementation of mentorship programs to more effectively facilitate professional development and success of women in academic medicine.

Indexed as

Career MobilityAcademic Medical CentersFaculty, MedicalFemaleHumansJob SatisfactionMentoringPhysicians, Womenacademic medicinementoringwomen

Identifiers

PMID31037545
PMCPMC6614283
OpenAlexW2942953461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.