ArticleJTCVS open2026
The influence of a longitudinal virtual research mentorship program on medical students' research skills.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Research experience is critical for medical students pursuing cardiothoracic surgery, yet many lack access to mentorship and research opportunities. To address this gap, the Eastern Cardiothoracic Surgical Society launched a virtual, longitudinal research mentorship program for students at institutions with limited cardiothoracic surgery opportunities. Methods: The Thoracic Surgery Medical Student Association distributed an anonymous survey to all program applicants (N = 94), assessing demographics, career goals, and research self-efficacy. Five selected students participated in a 24-week curriculum that covered research fundamentals and practical skills application. Following program completion, participants were surveyed and interviewed. Results: Seventy-five of 94 applicants completed the initial survey (79.8% response rate). The majority of applicants (48 out of 75 [64.0%]) had presented research but not published an article (41 out of 75 [54.7%]), and more than half (44 out of 75 [58.7%]) reported insufficient mentorship. After program completion for the 5 chosen participants, majority agreed/strongly agreed they were comfortable preparing a manuscript (4 out of 5 [80.0%]); giving poster/oral presentations (5 out of 5 [100%]); and using statistical skills (3 out of 5 [60.0%]), writing skills (4 out of 5 [80.0%]), and communication skills (5 out of 5 [100%]). Common interview themes included limited exposure to cardiothoracic surgery at home institutions, research skills improvement, improved exposure to the field, and the benefit of performing research in a collaborative setting. All participants believed this program would benefit other students. Conclusions: There are gaps in research exposure and mentorship among students interested in cardiothoracic surgery. This inaugural program effectively enhanced participants' research skills and provided significant exposure to cardiothoracic surgery mentors. Similar initiatives may foster further opportunities for student growth and early engagement within the specialty.
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.