ArticleBMC medical education2025
Evaluation of a mentorship matchmaking event at an academic research institution to reinforce the scientific workforce pathway for underrepresented minority groups.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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.
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
backgroundMentorship and research experiences are crucial for STEMM career entry and advancement. However, systemic barriers have excluded people from historically underrepresented groups.
methodsIn 2021, a virtual "matchmaking event" was held to connect NIH-funded research mentors with historically underrepresented trainees and initiate mentored research experiences. Survey data collected over 12 months was analyzed to evaluate the program's success considering the number of mentor-trainee connections, mentor-trainee research experience matches, and NIH diversity supplement application status. Statistical tests, including student's t-test, ANCOVAs, and chi-square tests, evaluated differences between attendee groups and survey time points.
resultsOut of 314 mentors contacted and 99 registered trainees, 113 mentors and 92 trainees participated. Among mentors (n = 73), 53% identified as women, 56% as non-Hispanic white, and a majority (81%) reported being the first in their family to attend college. Among trainees (n = 79), about two-thirds (67%) identified as women, 47% identified as Hispanic/Latinx, and 15% identified as Black/African American. Both mentors and trainees were extremely satisfied with the overall event (57% and 69%, respectively) and would recommend it to others (74% and 90%, respectively). Most mentor participants established at least one mentor-trainee connection after the event (n = 64, 57%), a mentor-trainee research experience match (n = 40, 35%), and planned to submit an NIH diversity supplement (n = 31, 27%). Many trainees obtained paid positions through the mentor-trainee research experience. One year after the event, 11 trainees secured NIH diversity supplement funding with their mentors.
conclusionsThe matchmaking event began bridging a much-needed gap in the research pathway by creating opportunities for trainees to connect with mentors and obtain funded research opportunities.
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.