ArticleBMC medical education2024
Implementation and evaluation of a mentorship program in clinical master in family medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic at the Arabian Gulf University: a longitudinal study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe implemented a contextualized innovative mentorship program in the Clinical Master in Family Medicine (CMFM) program established in April 2020 at Arabian Gulf University. In this paper, we describe the process of this program and derive the major challenges faced by trainees and related corrective actions and their outcomes on high-risk trainees for optimal performance.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-method longitudinal study of 80 trainees, analyzing information extracted from the Moodle learning platform about five key performance indicators as well as the contents (quantitative and qualitative) of mentoring meeting reports submitted through a validated online form between 2020 and 2022. We analyzed frequencies and themes of challenges and compared trainees' performance according to time and level of risk.
resultsThe follow-up of all 80 trainees in two cohorts (40 for each cohort) shows that most are female (93.75%) and the mean age is 30.00 ± 2.19 years with a ratio of mentors to mentees of 1 to 5. Meetings are conducted through phone calls, virtually, and face-to-face in 62%, 29%, and 8.3% respectively. The mean number and duration of meetings are 30.88 ± 2.31 and 20.08 ± 9.50 min respectively. Time management is the most reported challenge (41.3%), followed by health, social, and psychological-related issues in 7.6%, 4.6%, and 3% respectively. We extracted four main themes related to trainees, settings of training, e-Portfolio, and the COVID-19 pandemic. The mentorship program captured 12 trainees at high risk for low academic progress (12%) of whom six graduated on time and the remaining had to repeat a few courses the following terms. The performance of the program is stable over time (mean GPA of 3.30 (SE = 0.03), versus 3.34 (SE = 0.05) for cohorts 1 and 2 in the two years respectively, (P = 0.33). However, it is slightly lower among high-risk trainees compared to the remaining (GPA = 3.35 (SE = 0.03) versus 3.14 (SE = 0.08), P = 0.043) though above the minimum of the threshold of 3 out of 4, required for the master's degree.
conclusionThe mentorship program captured the struggling trainees and permitted to implement pertinent corrective actions timely, particularly in the context of a two-year intensive CMFM program during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.