ArticleWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2025
Participant Experiences with EMPOWER: Benefits, Barriers, and Best Practices for an Online Peer Mentorship and Leadership Program for Women in Academic Medicine.
Article in Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 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.
- Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization-A Leadership Intervention for Women in Academic Medicine.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2025Trial
- Women's leadership development programmes and gender equality: a systematic review in healthcare, academia and beyond.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: We developed the Engaging Peer Mentors for Opportunity, Well-Being, and Equity Realization (EMPOWER) program to provide leadership training and peer mentoring in a virtual, scalable format. Designed to be widely accessible to women leaders in academic medicine, it combined an asynchronous online curriculum with 1 hour per month group meetings Methods: We conducted individual interviews with 34 program participants as well as focus groups with 14 faculty advisors. These were conducted virtually at the program midpoint and following program completion. The Framework Method informed qualitative analysis. Results: Beneficial program outcomes included knowledge acquisition/skill development, new or different ways of thinking, a sense of empowerment/self-confidence, and the clarification of personal values/goals. Monthly, 1-hour peer meetings appeared to further facilitate learning and practical application. Barriers included a lack of time to complete didactic activities and to attend group meetings, limitations of an online/virtual format, individual circumstances, and idiosyncratic group dynamics. Recommendations to improve quality and establish best practices included clear communication of well-defined aims/expectations, tailored programming, efficient use of time, minimization of labor/mental load, and enhanced online community-building. Conclusions: The benefits program participants and their faculty advisors described reinforce the value of gender-aware leadership development programs, especially those that include peer mentoring. By enhancing accessibility, engagement, and flexibility, programs such as EMPOWER can become more inclusive and effective, ensuring that all promising leaders can thrive in academic medicine.
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.