ArticleThe chronicle of mentoring & coaching2024
Internal Consistency and Application of a Mentee Survey to Assess Mentor Competencies in an Academic Medical Center across Demographic Groups.
Article in The chronicle of mentoring & coaching, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The National Academies of Science stresses the importance of research mentoring. We assessed the internal consistency and application of a novel 33 item mentor evaluation survey and explored differences across subgroups. The survey was administered annually to mentees. The response rate was 17.8% for a sample of 710 respondents. The survey exhibited strong internal validity with Cronbach Alpha > 0.89 for each subscale. Overall scores across the three domains were high. Basic Science trainees scored their mentor significantly lower than those in Translational or Clinical Science across domains (0.11-0.25 points). Underrepresented Racial Ethnic Groups (UREG) trainee scores were significantly lower in academic guidance and personal communication. Women had lower scores in 4 out of 5 domains. The survey is a modified instrument to assess mentee experience, although further validation against mentee outcomes is needed.
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.