ArticleBMC medical education2024
Medical students' perception of a unique humanistic mentoring program in a religious university: a convergent parallel mixed methods 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. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe medical school of Tzu Chi University in Taiwan offers a unique, group-based, humanistic mentoring program as a complement to the programs mentored by faculty members and school counselors. The humanistic mentors are senior volunteers who are subject-matter experts in various fields and who embody the spirit of humanism in their lives. The average mentee-to-mentor ratio is around 3. This study explored medical students' perceptions of this unique program and focused on three major themes: guidance/support, mentor-mentee interaction/relationship, and cultivation of humanistic literacy.
methodsDuring the 2018-2019 academic year, we conducted a mixed methods study with a convergent parallel design targeting clerks and graduates undertaking post-graduate year training as the study population. The content validity index and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the validity and reliability of the questionnaires. Data comparisons between two subgroups were assessed using the Chi-square test. Quantitative data from 86 respondents based upon convenience sampling were collected by using a validated self-administered questionnaire (20 items each utilizing a Likert scale). Qualitative data from 20 interviewees based upon purposive sampling were collected through one-to-one interviews based on a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analyzed in parallel using thematic analysis and merged at the point of interpretation, allowing for triangulation and validation of results.
resultsRegarding the functional roles of three focused themes both quantitative and qualitative data revealed that participants viewed the program positively. The three quantitative items with the highest percentages of positive responses were related to mentors' endeavors to provide support (72%), to stay connected (69%), and to share their career and life experiences (72%). Interviewees perceived that their mentors provided timely guidance and support in response to their physical or mental needs and empowered them to cultivate humanistic literacy, both of which were mediated through a trusting, caring mentor-mentee relationship.
conclusionThe participants had positive perceptions regarding this unique humanistic mentoring program. As an educational strategy for medical students this type of humanistic mentoring holds great potential.
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.