ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2026
Peer-led mentoring to support racially minoritised applicants to UK public health specialty training: A regional pilot.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Differential attainment (DA) describes persistent differences in academic and professional outcomes between demographic groups that cannot be explained by differences in ability or effort. In UK public health specialty training, racially minoritised applicants experience lower success rates during recruitment. Peer-led mentoring interventions have shown potential in helping to address inequities by providing access to informal knowledge and support. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and early outcomes of a regional peer-led mentoring scheme designed to support racially minoritised applicants applying to UK public health specialty training. Study design: Pilot intervention and mixed-methods evaluation. Methods: This peer-led pilot intervention was delivered over two public health specialty recruitment cycles in the South-East of England. Applicants from Black and South Asian backgrounds were matched with current public health trainees ("buddies") for informal mentoring. Participation outcomes were tracked, and feedback was collected throughout the scheme alongside anonymous post-scheme surveys of applicants and buddies. Results: In 2023-24, 13% of participants in the buddy scheme were invited to interview, with 4.3% subsequently receiving offers, compared with a national offer rate of approximately 9.8%. In 2024-25, 17.2% of participants were invited to interview and 10.3% received offers, compared with national offer rates of approximately 5.7%. Applicants reported increased confidence and a clearer understanding of the recruitment process. Buddies described mentoring as rewarding but highlighted challenges balancing the role alongside existing workload. Conclusion: This peer-led buddy scheme appears feasible and valued by participants and may help support racially minoritised applicants navigating public health specialty recruitment. However, the small sample size and comparison with overall national offer rates, rather than ethnicity-specific comparator data, limit interpretation of recruitment outcomes. Addressing differential attainment is likely to require interventions beyond peer support alone and should be embedded within broader structural equity initiatives.
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.