ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Measuring the interpersonal component of the mentoring relationship: The mentorship working alliance scale - mentee version.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Satisfaction with academic supervision among nursing postgraduate students in China: a national multicenter cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Advancing the science and practice of effective mentorship.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The interpersonal and relational dimensions of mentoring have been identified as critical components of effective mentorship. However, no scale currently exists to assess this specific aspect of the relationship. This study introduces a new instrument, the mentorship working alliance (MWA) - mentee version, and presents initial evidence supporting its validity in evaluating the interpersonal elements of mentoring relationships. Methods: Through a series of pilot tests and revisions, we developed a 12-item scale that assesses two dimensions of the MWA: relational quality (6 items), which captures how a mentee feels about the relationship, and relational effectiveness (6 items), which reflects the mentee's perception of their mentor's actions in facilitating or advancing the working relationship. To evaluate the scale's construct validity and reliability, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and internal consistency reliability analysis on a sample of 345 graduate students. Results: CFA provided evidence for the validity of the two-dimensional MWA scale, which assesses relational quality and relational effectiveness, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.96 and 0.89, respectively. All parameter estimates for individual items were significant, with standardized factor loadings ranging from 0.66 to .83. Conclusions: The MWA scale - mentee version enables researchers to assess the interpersonal dimensions of mentoring relationships, offering valuable insights into the components of effective mentorship. By introducing this scale, we pave the way for further investigation into how mentorship interventions influence the MWA, thereby enhancing the overall quality of mentoring experiences. Additionally, we offer recommendations for future studies.
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.