ArticleCureus2023
Need Assessment of Existing Mentorship Program Among Undergraduate Medical Students: Experience From a Medical College in Chhattisgarh, India.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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.
- Encouraging research among undergraduate dental students.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society · 2026Article
- A National Oncology Fellows' Competition Advancing Clinical Research and Publication.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction While mentoring students during regular medical education has a long-standing tradition in many developed countries' medical schools, it has yet to become a standard practice in the majority of medical institutions, especially in the developing world, such as India. In institutions where mentoring programs are sparsely implemented, there is a lack of data regarding their assessment. Methodology This qualitative study involved two groups of students - nine undergraduate medical students (five male and four female) and 10 undergraduate medical students (six male and four female) who had at least three years of experience in the existing mentorship program at a tertiary care teaching hospital. We conducted two focused group discussions (FGDs) with these two groups of students using a guide, with FGDs lasting 45 and 50 minutes, respectively. We recorded the audio and it was transcripted to text. Thematic analysis of the transcripts from the 2 FGDs was conducted using Atlasti (Version 7.1.8) software to assess perceptions of the mentorship program. Results The content analysis of the discussions revealed two broad themes, namely "Current Functioning of the Programme" and "Suggestions for Improvement." These themes were further divided into multiple domains and subdomains, providing a comprehensive overview of the study's findings. Although there is a consensus among students that the mentorship program is essential, the current operational framework still has limited confidence due to biases, fears, and misinformation among the students. Conclusion The ongoing medical curriculum imparts a vast amount of scientific knowledge within a limited timeframe, with practical application occurring primarily in the last three years of the academic curriculum and minimal emphasis on ethical practice, professionalism, effective communication, handling urgent health situations, and interacting with family members, underscores the genuine need for a structured mentorship curriculum for undergraduate medical students. To enhance the program's effectiveness, the active involvement of undergraduate students must address their specific needs.
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.