ArticleThe chronicle of mentoring & coaching2019
Assigning mentors for new HSC faculty hires: A preliminary policy evaluation.
Article in The chronicle of mentoring & coaching, 2019. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence-based strategies for delivering grant writing skills to clinical and translational science faculty in the Mountain West.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Attitudes of Newly Hired Medicine Faculty Regarding Mentorship and Developmental Networks.The chronicle of mentoring & coaching · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Effective practices for selecting mentors for new faculty at academic health centers (AHC) are currently unknown. The University of New Mexico's School of Medicine assigns a mentor to all new faculty at the time of hire. The effectiveness of this policy measure has not been previously evaluated. The research question was to determine the proportion of new faculty mentees who meet with their assigned mentors before their mandatory orientation held within their first year of hire. At the orientation, faculty are surveyed about their response to the institutional policy of assigning mentors upon their hire. The proportion of new faculty mentees who met their assigned mentors prior to the orientation event constituted the primary study outcome. Of the 289 new faculty surveyed, 79.9% met their assigned mentors prior to the orientation - most meetings were weekly (48.8%) or monthly (27.9%). Among those who had not yet met their mentors, 65% planned to meet them within the month of the survey. 5.5% of all faculty reported a change of mentor from their initial assignment and 2.8% stated that they needed a different mentor. Physicians were less likely to meet with their assigned mentors than non-physician faculty (p=0.02). The preliminary policy evaluation demonstrates that most new faculty either meet or plan to meet their assigned mentors. Most participants stated that they did not need to be assigned a different mentor. Assigning mentors for new faculty hires may be considered a best practice at an AHC.
Identifiers
32490172PMC7266161W3029422109What 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.