Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40538281›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025

Experiences of Irish Mentors and Mentees Engaged in a National Nursing and Midwifery Mentorship Programme: Mixed Methods Study With a Qualitative Focus on Mentors' Views.

Martina Giltenane, Louise Murphy, Anna Chatzi, Claire Mcnamara, Lorelli Nowell, Marie Kilduff, Aoife Lane, Margaret Williams, Owen Doody

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Martina GiltenaneHealth Research Institute, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of EHS, Health Sciences Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4488-9692
Louise MurphyHealth Research Institute, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of EHS, Health Sciences Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Anna ChatziSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of EHS, Health Sciences Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4089-577X
Claire McnamaraHealth Research Institute, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of EHS, Health Sciences Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Lorelli NowellFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5401-4462
Marie KilduffNational Clinical Leadership Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Aoife LaneNational Clinical Leadership Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Margaret WilliamsNational Clinical Leadership Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Owen DoodyHealth Research Institute, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of EHS, Health Sciences Building, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3708-1647

Funding

Health Service Executive National Clinical Leadership Centre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo gain an understanding of the experiences of mentors and mentees engaging in a national mentoring programme within nursing and midwifery in Ireland.

designA two-phased convergent parallel mixed methods study was undertaken.

methodsThe first phase was a quantitative non-experimental descriptive study using an online survey with mentors (n = 12) and mentees (n = 6). The second phase was a qualitative descriptive study and involved focus group discussions with mentors (n = 5). No mentees took part in the focus group discussions. There was a disproportionate representation of mentors versus mentees in the total sample across both phases of this study. Data were collected between December 2023 and April 2024.

resultsMentorship has a positive impact on professional growth, job satisfaction and career development for both mentors and mentees in nursing and midwifery professions. Significant challenges to effective nursing and midwifery mentorship include time constraints, irregular work patterns and a need for additional managerial and structural support. Areas identified for improvement in programme implementation include clearly defined roles, dedicated time and space for mentorship meetings and tailored support systems to address cultural diversity.

conclusionThis study highlights the significant benefits of a national formal mentorship programme; however, substantial barriers continue to underscore the need for strategic improvements. Addressing these challenges through clearer role definitions, dedicated protected mentorship time and culturally responsive support systems may enhance mentorship programme effectiveness and ensure long-term sustainability. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.

Indexed as

MentoringMentorsMidwiferyAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleFocus GroupsHumansIrelandJob SatisfactionMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchmenteesmentorsmentorship programmemidwiferymixed‐methodsnursingprofessional development

Identifiers

PMID40538281
PMCPMC12535331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.