ArticleThe Journal of continuing education in the health professions2020
Effectiveness of a Faculty Mentor Development Program for Scholarship at an Academic Health Center.
Article in The Journal of continuing education in the health professions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scalable dissemination model for training faculty in mentor development and networking.Medical research archives · 2026Article
- Impact of Faculty Mentor Development Intervention on Mentees' Subjective Career Success.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2025Article
- Cross-Cultural Communication in Mentoring: Impact on Individual Growth.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2025Article
- Short-Term Impact of Faculty Mentor Development on Mentees' Scholarly Productivity.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2024Article
- Sustained Improvement of Faculty Mentoring Competency with a Mentor Development Program.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2024Article
- Perceptions in Mentorship: The Mentor-Mentee Competency Discrepancy.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2024Article
- Inter-Rater Reliability of the Mentor Behavioral Interaction Rubric.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2023Article
- Learning to Prioritize Our Collaborative Opportunities: Overcoming the Bright Shiny Object Syndrome.The Journal of continuing education in the health professions · 2023Article
- Development and Content Validity Testing of the Mentor Behavioral Interaction Rubric.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2022Article
- Attitudes of Newly Hired Medicine Faculty Regarding Mentorship and Developmental Networks.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2022Article
- A system-wide health sciences faculty mentor training program is associated with improved effective mentoring and institutional climate.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Evidence-based practice strategies for faculty professional development in clinical translational research at Institutional Development Award (IDeA) state institutions in the Mountain West.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Common Problematic Scholarly Activity Project Planning Expectations of Project Novices.Spartan medical research journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMentors are in short supply at academic health centers (AHCs). The effectiveness of training mentors (without preselection for their research skills) to support faculty mentees in scholarly activities at AHCs is not well known.
methodsThe University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center has a two-component program to develop effective mentors for scholarship for faculty mentees. It has an online component supplemented by an optional face-to-face (F2F) component. Study outcomes included changes in self-reported knowledge scores for online users and Mentoring Competency Assessment scores for F2F users.
resultsOne hundred five mentors, mostly women associate professors, used the online program. Online users demonstrated improvement in self-reported knowledge scores. Thirty-eight users additionally completed the F2F program-63% on a clinician-educator track and none with a National Institutes of Health-funded K-award mentee. The self-reported Mentoring Competency Assessment composite score rose from 4.3 ± 1.0 to 5.5 ± 0.8 (paired t = 7.37, df = 37, P < .001) for the F2F participants, with similar improvement noted in the clinician-educator subgroup. DISCUSSION: Users of the online and F2F components of the program improved their self-assessed knowledge and mentoring skill, respectively, demonstrating the effectiveness of the program. Such programs may help AHCs enhance the scholarship and the diversity of their scientific and clinician-educator workforce.
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.