Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41459051›Full record

ReviewAdvances in medical education and practice2025

Supervising PhD Candidates in Health and Medical Sciences: A Narrative Review of Strategies for Success.

Patrick Juliebø-Jones, Christian Beisland

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in medical education and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

2 authors.

Patrick Juliebø-JonesDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Christian BeislandDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: A PhD degree involves both structured and independent learning. It will allow the student to gain expertise and research skills. The supervisor is critical to this educational journey and can ultimately serve as a deciding factor as to whether the process is successful. There are a lack of studies synthesising evidence on what contributes to success. The aim of this narrative review was to identify and summarise the key elements contribute to successful doctoral supervision. Methods: A comprehensive but non-systematic search was undertaken to identify relevant studies across all disciplines, with a focus on medical and health sciences. Search terms included (but were not limited to) `PhD´, ´success´ and ´supervision´. Findings have been presented in a narrative format in three main sections: student-specific factors, supervisor-specific factors and shared themes. Results: Key student attributes that influenced successful supervision included intrinsic motivation, commitment to the research topic, self-management, and adaptation to cultural and personal change. Supervisory influences encompassed supervision style, level of training, institutional support, and research culture. Shared elements of the relationship involved the establishment of mutual expectations, open and regular communication, appropriate contact frequency, professional conduct, and respect. Conclusion: PhD supervision is a complex and evolving partnership requiring mutual engagement and reflection. Early clarification of roles and expectations, coupled with ongoing dialogue and professionalism, is essential to creating a positive supervisory environment and promoting doctoral success.

Indexed as

doctorateeducationmedicalPhDsupervision

Identifiers

PMID41459051
PMCPMC12739938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.