ArticleBMC medical education2026
Nationwide survey of formal mentorship characteristics and perceptions among resident physicians in Japan.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMentorship is considered essential in residency training, yet its structure and quality in Japan remain unclear.
methodsWe conducted a nationwide, multi-center descriptive study of postgraduate year (PGY) 1-2 residents who completed both the General Medicine In-Training Examination (GM-ITE) and a formal mentorship survey in 2024. Residents who declined participation, provided no response to the survey, had incomplete survey responses, or did not have a formal mentor were excluded.
resultsOf 9,179 residents who took the GM-ITE, 3,877 from 570 hospitals were analyzed. Most reported having one mentor (71.6%), and mentors were predominantly male (72.9%). Only 61.0% of programs offered lectures on mentorship. Overall, 46.1% of residents did not perceive feedback as specific or actionable, whereas 69.3% reported trusting their mentors. Mentoring interactions were relatively limited, with 60.4% of residents reporting meeting less than once a month.
conclusionsAmong residents with formally assigned mentors, important gaps remained in mentor diversity, feedback quality, and mentoring engagement. Efforts to strengthen mentor training, improve feedback practices, and promote more structured mentoring interactions may help optimize residents' educational and professional development.
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.