ArticleCureus2024
The Perceptions and Experiences of Medical Faculty on the Undergraduate Mentoring System.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Encouraging research among undergraduate dental students.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims Mentoring programs for medical students in medical institutions are essential for the benefit of both mentors and mentees. The present study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of medical faculty regarding the effectiveness and challenges of the undergraduate mentoring system in medical education. Materials and methods A descriptive cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among 122 medical faculty members. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire consisting of 20 questions via Google Forms (Google, Mountain View, California) through e-mail and WhatsApp. The collected data were expressed as frequencies and proportions. Results Among 122 respondents, the percentage of female and male faculty members were 54.1% and 45.9%, respectively. The majority of respondents (78.7%) do not receive formal training for mentoring, highlighting a potential area for improvement in the program. Most respondents (67.2%) felt comfortable or very comfortable addressing personal issues, indicating a positive environment for personal discussions. Of the medical faculty, 77.9% felt that the mentorship program contributes to personal development, while 84.4% of medical faculty members believe the program helps academic development. Institutional support for the mentoring program has been perceived as good by 68.9% of medical faculty members. Conclusion This study concludes that enhancing the undergraduate mentoring system in medical education necessitates a collaborative effort from faculty, administration, and students. By acknowledging and addressing the challenges identified in this study, medical colleges can create a more robust mentoring framework that not only supports faculty development but also enriches the educational journey of medical students.
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.