ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
The JUnior Faculty Mentoring Program (JUMP): A Novel Program to Teach Early-Career Faculty to Become Mentors.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly-career faculty are frequently asked to mentor, yet few receive training on how to successfully mentor. The JUnior faculty Mentoring Program (JUMP) was developed to train new faculty mentors.
aimWe describe the JUMP curriculum, participant characteristics, satisfaction and confidence with mentoring, and program improvement recommendations. SETTING AND
participantsOver nine years (2015-2023), JUMP was offered to early-career Department of Medicine faculty. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Three workshop sessions covered topics including communication, when to mentor (or not), aligning goals, and giving feedback. Participants were sent surveys before and after the program. Bivariate analyses compared 2015-2019 (earlier) and 2020-2023 (later) cohorts; content analysis examined what participants hoped to gain (pre-JUMP) and program improvement suggestions (post-JUMP). PROGRAM EVALUATION: Post-JUMP survey respondents (n = 151/197, 76.6%) reported increased confidence in knowing whether to take on a mentee (99.3%), ability to be an effective mentor (98%), setting goals and expectations (98.7%), and giving effective feedback to a mentee (86.8%). A substantial majority altered their approach with a mentee as result of JUMP (82.1%). Additionally, 62.9% felt more connected to and supported by the Department of Medicine after participating in JUMP. DISCUSSION: JUMP participants reported high levels of satisfaction and survey responses informed programmatic changes to better support faculty across disciplines to become mentors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42613403What 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.