Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36108091›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Mentoring future mentors in undergraduate medical education.

Yun Ting Ong, Chrystie Wan Ning Quek, Anushka Pisupati, Eleanor Kei Ying Loh, Vaishnavi Venktaramana, Min Chiam, Lalit Kumar Radha Krishna

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Strengthening the Process of Mentoring Through Portfolios.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yun Ting OngYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Chrystie Wan Ning QuekYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Anushka PisupatiYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Eleanor Kei Ying LohYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Vaishnavi VenktaramanaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Min ChiamDivision of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Lalit Kumar Radha KrishnaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7350-8644
National University of Singapore · SGNational Cancer Centre Singapore · SGUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEfforts to support flagging mentoring programs facing shortages of experienced clinical mentors have had an unexpected and welcome effect. Supplementing traditional mentoring programs with peer-mentoring have not only addressed gaps in practice, structure, support and mentee oversight but have offered mentees charged with peer-mentoring duties the opportunity to take on mentoring roles under senior supervision. This study evaluates the experiences of peer-mentors within a local research mentoring program to better understand and advance this endeavor.

methodsSemi-structured interviews and post-interview surveys based on recent reviews on mentoring were employed. Adapting the Systematic Evidence Based Approach, data was analysed using thematic and content analysis. Results were combined using the Jigsaw Perspective to ensure that key elements of the different mentoring stages were identified.

resultsThe interviews and surveys revealed the following domains: Motivation, Initiation, Practicing, and Mentoring Environment.

conclusionThese findings provide novel insight into a structured framework that may help guide the experiences, training, assessment, and oversight of peer-mentors beyond the auspices of our local program. These general observations will equip host organizations with the direction they need to take in designing and executing peer-mentoring training and assessment programs of their own. Whilst the stages of peer-mentoring need further evaluation and an effective means of assessment and support pivotal, we believe our findings suggest that peer-mentoring may not only help to address the shortfall in mentors but is an invaluable learning experience that prepares and instils key values, beliefs and principles in young would-be mentors.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateMentoringHumansMentorsPeer GroupSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36108091
PMCPMC9477267
OpenAlexW4296035487

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.