ArticleUI journal2018
Validation of a Scale for Mentoring Practices Specific to Scientific Communication among Trainees.
Article in UI journal, 2018. 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.
- Mentoring Barriers, Expected Outcomes, and Practices in Scientific Communication: Scale Development and Validation.Journal of career development · 2022Article
- Identifying Effective Mentors in Scientific Communication: A Latent Profile Analysis of Mentor Beliefs.Journal of career development · 2022Article
- The role of scientific communication in predicting science identity and research career intention.PloS one · 2020Article
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
Abstract
Scientific communication skills are critical to success in research science. Mentoring trainees, from undergraduate to postdoctoral and even junior faculty levels, has become an important research focus for transferring these skills. Our group has developed the Mentoring Practices Scale to assess mentoring behaviors toward trainees in the domains of general research (technical career, psychosocial) and scientific communication (writing, oral presentations, impromptu speaking/conversations about science and research). However, this scale, especially the Mentoring Practices Scale in Scientific Communication (MPS-SciComm), has not been assessed in trainee samples to determine whether the scale is reliable and valid. The purpose of the current study was to test the three factors of the scientific communication component of the scale among doctoral and postdoctoral trainees. Confirmatory factor analyses were performed on data from two samples of trainees (N
Indexed as
Identifiers
39737439PMC11684759What 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.