ArticleGMS journal for medical education2022
Between clinical practice, teaching and research - a project report on the development and implementation of a career mentoring curriculum for female clinician scientists.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Gender equity in Critical Care Medicine. How much have we progressed?Critical care science · 2025Article
- Career and life planning in the context of the postgraduate medical training - current challenges and opportunities.GMS journal for medical education · 2024Article
- What do hematologists and oncologists consider necessary for their career? Results of an online survey in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Between expectation and reality. A plea for more evidence-based bedside teaching.GMS journal for medical education · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Despite the high proportion of female medical students, the leading positions in almost all medical departments are still considerably less often held by female clinicians than by male. The aim of this project report is to introduce a career mentoring curriculum for female clinician scientists at Ruhr-University of Bochum in Germany. Methods: The career mentoring program was developed for young female clinician scientists who aim for a leading position in academic medicine. We describe and discuss herein its planning and implementation over two years (11/2020-11/2022) focusing on the needs of the target group. Results: The mentoring program is based on an agile twin-track strategy. It includes peer mentoring, content-related input and interdisciplinary three-to-one mentoring by the coordinators. Additionally, the mentees develop and conduct a scientific project to practice their acquired skills in a protected environment. The quality assurance system of the mentoring program includes a continuous evaluation of the mentees' satisfaction with the content and organisation of the program, whose results serve as the basis of the prompt adjustment of the latter. It also includes an evaluation of the sustainable impact of the program on the mentees' career development based on an adapted role matrix. The role matrix addresses the mentees to acquire the competencies required for them to become a successful clinician, scientist and academic teacher. Conclusions: A 2-year innovative and unique career mentoring program for female clinician scientists was developed and already successfully launched. Making use of different mentoring strategies, the program has the potential to promote gender equality and encourage female physicians to pursue a career in academic medicine.
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.