Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38640406›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2024

What Makes a Good Match? Predictors of Quality Mentorship Among Doctoral Students.

Trevor T Tuma, Erin L Dolan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Trevor T TumaWarnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, and.
Erin L DolanDepartment of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602.
University of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality mentoring promotes graduate student success. Despite an abundance of practical advice, empirical evidence regarding how to match mentees and mentors to form quality mentoring relationships is lacking. Here, we examine the influence of variables theorized to predict mentorship support and quality in a national sample of 565 science doctoral students from 70 universities in 38 states. Our structural equation modeling results indicate that mentor rank, mentee capital, and the relationship matching mechanism (direct admissions, rotations) were not associated with higher-quality relationships. We found no support for the widely held belief that students whose mentors shared their gender, race, or ethnicity experienced greater mentorship quality. Rather, mentees who shared attitudes, beliefs, and values with their mentor, or whose mentors displayed greater cultural awareness experienced more supportive, higher quality mentoring. Furthermore, these patterns were largely consistent across both mentee and mentor demographic groups. These results highlight the potential benefits of pairing mentees and mentors who share personal and intrinsic qualities rather than demographic or surface-level attributes. Our findings also indicate that graduate students from marginalized backgrounds can be effectively mentored by faculty who are demographically dissimilar if their mentors engage in culturally aware mentorship.

Indexed as

MentoringMentorsAttitudeHumansProgram EvaluationStudents

Identifiers

PMID38640406
PMCPMC11235109
OpenAlexW4394969825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.