ArticleBMC nursing2023
Mentoring in research: development of competencies for health professionals.
Article in BMC nursing, 2023. 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.
- Perceptions and characteristics of the mentor role in research capacity building programs for clinicians: a scoping review and thematic analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Interpretations of reproducibility crisis in medical education research: a qualitative study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bridging the mentorship divide: how large language models could reshape medical workforce equity.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Mentorship among healthcare researchers: a social network analysis.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- The scholarly and practice profile of respiratory therapists in Canada: A cross-sectional survey.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMentoring programmes in health research are beneficial for both mentors and mentees and are essential for the development of the next generation of research leaders. This study describes the self-assessment of research skills in health professionals participating in a research mentoring programme and determines the correlation between the participants' self-assessment of research skills and professional characteristics.
methodThis was a quasi-experimental, time-series study conducted in a Brazilian tertiary hospital. Thirty-five health professionals holding a master's or PhD degree were included. The participants answered a survey in which they self-assessed their research skills distributed into eight domains, with one group responding before training and another group responding after training. The level of significance was set at 5% (p < 0.05).
resultsThose who received training scored better in research skills related to two domains: critical analysis of the literature and identification of appropriate research methods (p = 0.0245).
conclusionTrained professionals performed better in the domains of critical thinking and knowledge and management of steps in the research process.
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.