ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2024
Committed to Success: A Structured Mentoring Program for Clinically Oriented Physicians.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide survey of formal mentorship characteristics and perceptions among resident physicians in Japan.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Bending or breaking? Examining the relationship between psychological inflexibility, resilience, professional fulfilment and burnout among cancer care professionals in Ireland.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A Group Approach to Clinical Research Mentorship at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine impacts of a structured mentorship committee program on academic promotion and participant perceptions because impacts of formal mentorship programs for clinical faculty are unknown. Participants and Methods: This prospective cohort study at a Midwestern Veterans Affairs tertiary care system from December 17, 2019 to December 31, 2022 included clinical track faculty in the Medicine Service below the rank of Clinical Associate Professor. Mentoring meetings (mentee, committee chair, and mentors) were generally held twice annually. All participants were surveyed after each meeting (response rate: 100%). Results: All 23 of 23 (100%) eligible faculty were enrolled as mentees, and 49 distinct meetings occurred. Three (13%) mentees were promoted, and the remaining 20 (87%) continued in the program. Mean scores (SD), scaled 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), for mentors and mentees were 4.71 (0.51) and 4.80 (0.54) for "effective use of my time"; 4.58 (0.64) and 4.37 (0.49) for "appropriate progress since last meeting"; 4.52 (0.66) and 4.31 (0.64) for "program increased my work satisfaction"; and 4.07 (0.96) and 3.75 (0.92) for "program reduced my work burnout," respectively. Conclusion: Clinically oriented physicians viewed the program positively. It appeared to help junior faculty get promoted and led to improved work satisfaction and reduced burnout.
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.