A scoping review of mentor training programs in medicine between 1990 and 2017

Gender Disparities in Mentorship and Career Outcomes in Ophthalmology

Background: Gender disparities in the field of ophthalmology have been increasingly recognized. Although mentorship has been proposed as a contributing factor, there are limited data on the differences in mentorship experiences by gender among ophthalmologists. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate gender disparities in mentorship experiences among ophthalmologists, and the impact of mentorship disparities on career outcomes. Design: Prospective, cross-sectional study. Setting: Web-based survey distributed through ophthalmology listservs. Participants: Ophthalmologists and ophthalmologists-in-training who completed the survey. Exposure: Training and practicing in the field of ophthalmology. Main Outcome Measures: Mentorship score based on 10 items from a previously published scale of mentorship quality and self-reported career outcomes (income, job satisfaction, achievement of career goals, and support to achieve future career goals). Results: We received survey responses from 202 male and 245 female ophthalmologists. Female ophthalmologists reported significantly lower mentorship satisfaction and worse quality of mentorship (p < 0.03). Female ophthalmologists also reported significantly lower income, worse job satisfaction, and lower rates of goal achievement and support to achieve future goals; all of these career outcomes, except income level, were partly mediated by mentorship score (mediation effect ranged from 29% to 68%, p < 0.014). Conclusions and Relevance: Gender-based inequities in achievement of career goals and job satisfaction are partly mediated by disparities in mentorship. Therefore, focused mentorship of women in ophthalmology at all career stages is imperative to reduce these inequities.

Mentor communication skills training: development, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is vital to career development in academic medicine, and communication underlies all aspects of the mentoring relationship. Although training research mentors has been shown to be effective, few academic medicine faculties have received training in how to mentor. The investigators developed a novel intervention, the Mentor Communication Skills Training for Oncology Faculty ("Comskil Mentor Training") and examined feasibility and preliminary efficacy.

METHODS

The study was a single arm pre-post intervention design. The intervention (Comskil Mentor Training) was offered in one virtual 3-hour session and included a didactic lecture with exemplary skill demonstration videos, facilitator-led small group role plays with trained actors, and evaluation. 19 faculty members from 12 departments participated in the training.

RESULTS

All participants completed the training. Overall, the training was rated favorably, with more than 80% of participants indicating that they "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with training evaluation. From pre- to post-training, significant improvement was seen in participants' overall self-efficacy to communicate with mentees, as well as participants' overall use of communication skills and mentoring-specific language.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a virtually delivered experiential mentor communication skills training program for multidisciplinary clinical and research faculty in oncology.

Supporting early-career women researchers: lessons from a global mentorship programme

Mentorship is an important contributor to strengthening research capacity among health researchers. Formal mentorship programmes, targeting women mentees can help mitigate some of the gendered power dynamics and can also help early career researchers learn from others' experiences of navigating these challenges. In 2020, the UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction at the World Health Organization launched a mentorship programme geared towards early career women researchers. This paper describes the process of designing and implementing a mentorship programme for early career women sexual and reproductive health and rights researchers from low- and middle-income countries including valuable lessons learned vis-à-vis existing evidence. Some of these findings have been incorporated into iterations of the programme launched in 2022. Critical points include: ensuring considerations for language and geographical distribution; allowing mentees to participate in the matching process; providing training and opportunities to network and learn from other participants; offering the support and structure for developing these relationships. Providing women researchers with the tools - through mentorship - to navigate the unique challenges they face in their career journeys, can have a lasting impact on research capacity. Countries and institutions committed to strengthening research capacity need to focus on the holistic growth and motivation of individuals in a way that ensures gender equality.

Support, networks, and relationships: Findings from a mixed-methods evaluation of a mentorship programme for early career women researchers in sexual and reproductive health and rights

Low research output among women researchers in health research has been linked to inadequate mentorship opportunities for early career women researchers and particularly in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) field. Mentorship has been recognized as a contributor to strengthening research capacity and as beneficial for both mentors and mentees. Women researchers oftentimes experience negative impacts of organizational and structural gender inequities related to formal and informal mentoring. In 2020, the UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction at WHO launched a mentorship programme for early career SRHR women researchers from low- and middle-income countries. The programme sought to provide professional skill-building, promote and share networking opportunities, and offer support in navigating personal and professional life. We conducted a convergent parallel mixed-methods evaluation of the 2020 pilot programme, which included 26 participants, through an online survey and semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs). Data collection occurred between March and May 2022. Nineteen responded to the online survey (12 mentees, 7 mentors) and 11 IDIs (7 mentees, 4 mentors) were completed. Based on a preliminary framework, we used deductive and inductive methods to identify six themes: views on mentorship; reasons for applying and expectations of participation in the programme; preferred aspects of programme implementation; challenges with the programme implementation; perceived lasting benefits of the programme; and recommendations for improvement. All participants found the initial training useful, most discussed work-life prioritization throughout the mentorship relationship, and most planned to continue with the relationship. There appear to be ample benefits to mentorship, especially when planned and implemented in a structured manner. These attributes can be particularly beneficial when they are conceived as a two-way relationship of mutual learning and support, and especially for women at the start of their research careers as they navigate structural gender inequities.

Trainees' perceptions of course quality in postgraduate General Practice training in Ireland

BACKGROUND

Postgraduate General Practice (GP) training is structured around a formal curriculum set out by the training body. It also includes a "hidden curriculum" of experiential workplace learning in a heterogenous learning environment [1]. There is no formal national annual survey of GP trainees and their views in Ireland.

METHODS

The research aim was to evaluate what the trainee population think of their training environment, and to analyse the contributory factors. A mixed methods cross-sectional survey was distributed to all third- and fourth-year GP trainees (N = 404). The Manchester Clinical Placement Index was adapted for the study.

RESULTS

The response rate was 30.94% (N = 125). Questions 1 to 7 provided a description of the characteristics of the study population. The remainder of the questions focused on aspects which relate to constituents of the learning environment. The responses were broadly and convincingly positive and supportive of the good work being done in GP training and by trainers in Ireland today across both qualitative and quantitative findings. One notable exception was in the area of feedback where single handed fourth year practices were found to be underperforming.

CONCLUSIONS

The current research findings were broadly positive and supportive of the good work being done in GP training and by trainers in Ireland today. Further research will be needed to validate the study instrument and to further refine some aspects of its configuration. The implementation of such a survey on a regular basis may have merit as part of the quality assurance process in GP education alongside existing feedback structures [2].

Need Assessment of Existing Mentorship Program Among Undergraduate Medical Students: Experience From a Medical College in Chhattisgarh, India

Introduction While mentoring students during regular medical education has a long-standing tradition in many developed countries' medical schools, it has yet to become a standard practice in the majority of medical institutions, especially in the developing world, such as India. In institutions where mentoring programs are sparsely implemented, there is a lack of data regarding their assessment. Methodology This qualitative study involved two groups of students - nine undergraduate medical students (five male and four female) and 10 undergraduate medical students (six male and four female) who had at least three years of experience in the existing mentorship program at a tertiary care teaching hospital. We conducted two focused group discussions (FGDs) with these two groups of students using a guide, with FGDs lasting 45 and 50 minutes, respectively. We recorded the audio and it was transcripted to text. Thematic analysis of the transcripts from the 2 FGDs was conducted using Atlasti (Version 7.1.8) software to assess perceptions of the mentorship program. Results The content analysis of the discussions revealed two broad themes, namely "Current Functioning of the Programme" and "Suggestions for Improvement." These themes were further divided into multiple domains and subdomains, providing a comprehensive overview of the study's findings. Although there is a consensus among students that the mentorship program is essential, the current operational framework still has limited confidence due to biases, fears, and misinformation among the students. Conclusion The ongoing medical curriculum imparts a vast amount of scientific knowledge within a limited timeframe, with practical application occurring primarily in the last three years of the academic curriculum and minimal emphasis on ethical practice, professionalism, effective communication, handling urgent health situations, and interacting with family members, underscores the genuine need for a structured mentorship curriculum for undergraduate medical students. To enhance the program's effectiveness, the active involvement of undergraduate students must address their specific needs.

Key steps and suggestions for a promising approach to a critical care mentoring program

In critical care medicine, where there is a demanding career with a problematic work-life balance, mentoring is an important support tool to grow professionally, creating a network of support throughout the career. The mentoring process consists of evidence-based steps to guide critical care mentors and mentees and pair them with each other according to the correct selection and matching of participants.In order to focus on the active role of a young intensivist selected as a mentee at any level and to support their success in a mentoring relationship, the NEXT Committee of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) developed 2012 a mentoring program.The critical steps of the mentoring program start from establishing a policy and program objectives, passing through the selection of participants, and matching with mentors up to the definition of the personal development plan supported by checklists, worksheets, and evaluation forms. The present manuscript provides key steps and tips for a good, essential based on our experience in the ESICM NEXT-Mentoring Program so that they guide for future mentoring programs conducted by other scientific societies. In addition, we discuss common challenges and how to avoid them.

Mentor training for junior faculty: a brief evaluation report from the Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance

To provide a foundation for mentoring, junior faculty participated in a mentor training workshop informed by the Mentoring Clinical and Translational Researchers curriculum. The goal was to develop skills and behaviors that engender more rewarding and inclusive mentoring practices. Attendees responded to baseline and follow-up surveys assessing perceived mentoring skills. Follow-up surveys included closed- and open-ended questions about the value and satisfaction of the training, and intended behavior changes. Junior faculty respondents (n = 39) reported significantly higher overall mentoring skills after the training (t = -2.6, p = 0.012) with a medium effect size (Cohen's D = 0.59). Domains with statistically significant improvement from baseline to follow-up included aligning mentor-mentee expectations and assessing understanding. Thirty-eighty (97%) found the training valuable, and 32 (82%) indicated they would change mentoring-related behaviors because of the training. Intended behavior changes described in open-ended responses aligned with mentoring skills assessed (e.g., aligning expectations). An additional competency domain of evaluating mentoring relationships was also described. A mentor training workshop for junior faculty appeared to contribute to changes in mentoring skills and intended behaviors. Mentor training has the potential to enhance mentorship, which is critical to strengthening a diverse pipeline of clinical and translational science researchers.

The Knowledge Gap: Mentorship in Emergency Medicine Residency

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Studies of mentorship in emergency medicine show that mentored residents are twice as likely to describe their career preparation as excellent as compared to nonmentored peers. There has been significant interest in the mentor-mentee relationship in medicine; however, there is minimal guidance and published literature specific to emergency medicine residents.

METHODS

In this narrative review, we described the emergency medicine mentor-mentee relationship, discussed alternatives to the traditional dyadic model, and highlighted current barriers to effective mentorship. We conducted a structured literature review to identify relevant published articles regarding the mentoring of emergency medicine residents. Additional studies from general mentoring literature were included based on relevancy.

RESULTS

We identified 39 studies in emergency medicine literature based on our search criteria. Additional studies from general medicine literature were included based on relevancy to this review. Based on the limited available literature, we recommend maximizing the resident mentoring relationship by developing formal mentoring programs, supporting the advancement of women and underrepresented minority mentors, and moving toward team mentoring, including peer, near-peer, and collaborative mentorship. The development of a mentoring network is a logical strategy for residents to work with a diverse group of individuals to maximize benefits in multiple areas.

CONCLUSION

Alternative approaches to the traditional and hierarchal dyadic mentoring style (eg, team mentoring) are effective methods that residencies may promote to increase effective mentoring. Future efforts in mentoring emergency medicine residents emphasize these strategies, which are increasingly beneficial given the constraints and use of technology highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Scoping Review of Health Care Faculty Mentorship Programs in Academia: Implications for Program Design, Implementation, and Outcome Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Formal mentoring programs have direct benefits for academic health care institutions, but it is unclear whether program designs use recommended components and whether outcomes are being captured and evaluated appropriately. The goal of this scoping review is to address these questions.

METHODS

We completed a literature review using a comprehensive search in SCOPUS and PubMed (1998-2019), a direct solicitation for unpublished programs, and hand-searched key references, while targeting mentor programs in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. After three rounds of screening, team members independently reviewed and extracted assigned articles for 40 design data items into a comprehensive database.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight distinct mentoring programs were represented in the data set. The team members clarified specific mentor roles to assist the analysis. The analysis identified mentoring program characteristics that were properly implemented, including identifying program goals, specifying the target learners, and performing a needs assessment. The analysis also identified areas for improvement, including consistent use of models/frameworks for program design, implementation of mentor preparation, consistent reporting of objective outcomes and career satisfaction outcomes, engagement of program evaluation methods, increasing frequency of reports as programs as they mature, addressing the needs of specific faculty groups (eg, women and minority faculty), and providing analyses of program cost-effectiveness in relation to resource allocation (return on investment).

CONCLUSION

The review found that several mentor program design, implementation, outcome, and evaluation components are poorly aligned with recommendations, and content for URM and women faculty members is underrepresented. The review should provide academic leadership information to improve these discrepancies.

Implementation and first experiences with a multimodal mentorship curriculum for medicine-paediatrics residents

INTRODUCTION

Mentorship increases trainee productivity, promotes career satisfaction and reduces burnout. Beginning in 2016, our Medicine-Paediatrics residency program developed and implemented a longitudinal mentorship curriculum among trainees. We report initial experiences with that program and discuss potential future directions.

CURRICULUM STRUCTURE AND METHOD OF IMPLEMENTATION

We implemented and adapted a peer mentorship model and expanded it to include guest lectures and workshops centred around 13 core topics. Our expanded model included five longitudinal components: (1) peer mentorship; (2) virtual check-ins with residency leadership; (3) focussed didactics and workshops; (4) small-group dinners highlighting different career paths; and (5) dedicated faculty who pair residents with mentors based on common interests. We compared annual survey results on resident satisfaction with program mentorship, using chi-square and fisher's exact tests to assess statistically significant differences pre- (2012-2016) and post-intervention (2016-2020).

RESULTS

We analysed 112 responses with annual response rate varying between 41.2% and 100%. Overall satisfaction with mentorship improved from 57.6% to 73.4% (p = .53), satisfaction with emotional support improved from 63.1% to 71.6% (p = .21), and satisfaction with career-specific mentorship improved from 48.5% to 59.5% (p = .70). Residents reported consistently high satisfaction with peer mentorship (77.8%-100%). The percent of residents reporting they had identified a career mentor increased from 60.0% in 2017 to 88.9% in 2019, which was sustained at 90.0% in 2020.

CONCLUSION

We report our experience in implementing and adapting a mentorship curriculum for resident physicians in a single training program, including transitioning to a primarily online-based platform at the outset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our results showed a trend towards improvement in resident satisfaction with overall and career-specific mentorship, as well as improved emotional support. Future work is needed using more objective outcome markers among a larger and more diverse group of residents. KEY MESSAGESAmong resident physicians in a single training program, a mix of mentor-mentee dyads, group-based peer mentoring and a structured curriculum has shown promise in improving resident-reported satisfaction with programmatic mentorshipWhile we attempted to adapt the mentorship curriculum to an online platform with the development of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, reported satisfaction in overall mentorship and emotional support decreased in comparison to the prior year, an important focus for future work.

Mentoring future mentors in undergraduate medical education

Background

Efforts to support flagging mentoring programs facing shortages of experienced clinical mentors have had an unexpected and welcome effect. Supplementing traditional mentoring programs with peer-mentoring have not only addressed gaps in practice, structure, support and mentee oversight but have offered mentees charged with peer-mentoring duties the opportunity to take on mentoring roles under senior supervision. This study evaluates the experiences of peer-mentors within a local research mentoring program to better understand and advance this endeavor.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews and post-interview surveys based on recent reviews on mentoring were employed. Adapting the Systematic Evidence Based Approach, data was analysed using thematic and content analysis. Results were combined using the Jigsaw Perspective to ensure that key elements of the different mentoring stages were identified.

Results

The interviews and surveys revealed the following domains: Motivation, Initiation, Practicing, and Mentoring Environment.

Conclusion

These findings provide novel insight into a structured framework that may help guide the experiences, training, assessment, and oversight of peer-mentors beyond the auspices of our local program. These general observations will equip host organizations with the direction they need to take in designing and executing peer-mentoring training and assessment programs of their own. Whilst the stages of peer-mentoring need further evaluation and an effective means of assessment and support pivotal, we believe our findings suggest that peer-mentoring may not only help to address the shortfall in mentors but is an invaluable learning experience that prepares and instils key values, beliefs and principles in young would-be mentors.

Mentoring is in the 'I' of the beholder: supporting mentors in reflecting on their actual and preferred way of mentoring

BACKGROUND

An important strategy to support the professional development of mentors in health professions education is to encourage critical reflection on what they do, why they do it, and how they do it. Not only the 'how' of mentoring should be covered, but also the implicit knowledge and beliefs fundamental to the mentoring practice (a mentor's personal interpretative framework). This study analyzed the extent to which mentors perceive a difference between how they actually mentor and how they prefer to mentor.

METHODS

The MERIT (MEntor Reflection InstrumenT) survey (distributed in 2020, N = 228), was used to ask mentors about the how, what, and why of their mentoring in two response modes: (1) regarding their actual mentoring practice and (2) regarding their preferred mentoring practice. With an analysis of covariance, it was explored whether potential discrepancies between these responses were influenced by experience, profession of the mentor, and curriculum-bound assessment requirements.

RESULTS

The averaged total MERIT score and averaged scores for the subscales 'Supporting Personal Development' and 'Monitoring Performance' were significantly higher for preferred than for actual mentoring. In addition, mentors' experience interacted significantly with these scores, such that the difference between actual and preferred scores became smaller with more years of experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Mentors can reflect on their actual and preferred approach to mentoring. This analysis and the potential discrepancy between actual and preferred mentoring can serve as input for individual professional development trajectories.

Mentoring in palliative medicine in the time of covid-19: a systematic scoping review : Mentoring programs during COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

The redeployment of mentors and restrictions on in-person face-to-face mentoring meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic has compromised mentoring efforts in Palliative Medicine (PM). Seeking to address these gaps, we evaluate the notion of a combined novice, peer-, near-peer and e-mentoring (CNEP) and interprofessional team-based mentoring (IPT) program.

METHODS

A Systematic Evidence Based Approach (SEBA) guided systematic scoping review was carried out to study accounts of CNEP and IPT from articles published between 1st January 2000 and 28th February 2021. To enhance trustworthiness, concurrent thematic and content analysis of articles identified from structured database search using terms relating to interprofessional, virtual and peer or near-peer mentoring in medical education were employed to bring together the key elements within included articles.

RESULTS

Fifteen thousand one hundred twenty one abstracts were reviewed, 557 full text articles were evaluated, and 92 articles were included. Four themes and categories were identified and combined using the SEBA's Jigsaw and Funnelling Process to reveal 4 domains - characteristics, mentoring stages, assessment methods, and host organizations. These domains suggest that CNEP's structured virtual and near-peer mentoring process complement IPT's accessible and non-hierarchical approach under the oversight of the host organizations to create a robust mentoring program.

CONCLUSION

This systematic scoping review forwards an evidence-based framework to guide a CNEP-IPT program. At the same time, more research into the training and assessment methods of mentors, near peers and mentees, the dynamics of mentoring interactions and the longitudinal support of the mentoring relationships and programs should be carried out.

Pragmatic Mentoring Strategies for the Busy Surgeon Scientist

OBJECTIVE

The value of research mentorship in academic medicine is well-recognized, yet there is little practical advice for how to develop and sustain effective mentoring partnerships. Gaining research skill and mentorship is particularly critical to success in academic surgery, yet surgeon scientists are challenged in their mentorship efforts by time constraints and lack of education on how to mentor. To address this gap, this study explored the strategies that award-winning faculty mentors utilize in collaborating with their medical student mentees in research.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

For this qualitative study, the authors invited physician recipients of an institution-wide mentorship award to participate in individual, semi-structured interviews during July and August 2018. Following interview transcription, the authors independently coded the text and collaboratively identified common mentoring strategies and practices via a process of thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Nine physician mentors, representing a mix of genders, medical specialties and types of research (basic science, clinical, translational, and health services), participated in interviews. The authors identified 12 strategies and practices from the interview transcripts that fell into 5 categories: Initiating the partnership; Determining the research focus; Providing project oversight; Developing mentee research competence; and Supporting mentee self-efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Award-winning mentors employ a number of shared strategies when mentoring medical trainees in research. These strategies can serve as a guide for academic surgeons who wish to improve their research mentoring skills.

Prevalence of, Qualities, and Barriers Associated with Mentoring Relationships from Medical Students' Perspective: A Multi-Institutional Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVES

Reports of medical student mentorship prevalence range between 26% and 77%. This broad range likely reflects the tendencies of studies to focus on specific populations of medical students. There is little consensus about the characteristics of mentoring relationships among medical students. The primary goal of this study was to determine the reported prevalence of mentorship among medical students in the United States. The secondary goals were to assess the desired qualities of and barriers to successful mentoring from a medical student perspective.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was administered via Qualtrics to all medical students at participating accredited medical schools from July 2018 to March 2019. The questionnaire contained a subsection of questions that assessed the existence of mentoring, facilitators, and barriers in finding a mentor, and the desired qualities of a successful mentor.

RESULTS

With a 94% completion rate, 369 (69%) of 532 medical students reported having a mentor. Adjusted analysis showed that fourth-year medical students were significantly more likely to have a mentor compared with first-year (odds ratio [OR] 2.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49-4.73, P = 0.001), second-year (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.14-3.76, P = 0.016), and third-year medical students (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.2-3.90, P = 0.011). Compassion (64%) was the most commonly reported quality in a successful mentoring relationship. Lack of time from mentor (75%) was the most commonly reported barrier.

CONCLUSIONS

This study may serve as a guide to fostering more supportive mentoring relationships. Each mentoring relationship should be tailored to the needs of the mentee, however.

Threshold concepts in group-based mentoring and implications for faculty development: A qualitative analysis

INTRODUCTION

The literature on faculty development programs for mentors is scarce. This study examines mentors' experiences and challenges, with the aim of identifying threshold concepts in mentoring. It also discusses the implications for the faculty development of mentors.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews solicited personal narratives and reflections on mentors' lived experiences. Data analysis was guided by the threshold concepts framework allowing for the identification of significant and transformative shifts in perspectives.

RESULTS

We interviewed 22 mentors from two Norwegian and one Canadian medical school with group-based mentoring programs. The mentoring experience involved four significant threshold concepts: focusing on students' needs; the importance of creating a trusting learning space; seeing oneself through the eyes of students; and aligning mentor and physician identities.

CONCLUSION

Taking on a mentor role can provoke personal and professional dilemmas while also sparking growth. The trajectories of developing as a mentor and as a professional physician may be seen to mutually validate, mirror and reinforce each other. Faculty development programs designed specifically for mentors should aim to stimulate reflection on previous learning experiences and strive for a successful alignment of the distinct pedagogical and clinical content knowledge required to fulfill various professional roles.

Career Development of Academic Staff in Faculties of Dentistry by Means of Mentorship Programs: Protocol for a Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Globally, the demands on dental educators continue to diversify and expand. Due to their importance and value, mentoring programs have been acknowledged as a means of recruiting, developing, and retaining academics in dental education.

OBJECTIVE

This protocol is for a scoping review that aims to identify the goals of mentoring programs for academic staff in dental faculties and determine how these programs were structured, delivered, and evaluated.

METHODS

The review will be performed in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews, which covers both qualitative and quantitative scientific literature as well as grey literature written in English and published between 2000 and 2020. The databases will include PubMed, Ovid, the Educational Resources Information Center database, Science Direct, Scopus, Google Scholar, Trove, Web of Science, Openthesis.org, and the website of the American Dental Education Association. A manual search will also be conducted by using the reference lists of included studies to identify additional articles. Working independently, the authors will participate iteratively in literature screening, paper selection, and data extraction. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion until a consensus is reached or after consultation with the research team. Key information that is relevant to the review questions will be extracted from the selected articles and imported into a Microsoft Excel file. The PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) will be used to guide the reporting of this protocol.

RESULTS

The search for appropriate literature has commenced, and we aim to present the results before the end of the 2021 academic year.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of formal mentorship programs for academics in dental education will enhance the retention of academic staff.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/27239.

Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Over the last two decades, the number of scoping reviews in core medical education journals has increased by 4200%. Despite this growth, research on scoping reviews provides limited information about their nature, including how they are conducted or why medical educators undertake this knowledge synthesis type. This gap makes it difficult to know where the field stands and may hamper attempts to improve the conduct, reporting and utility of scoping reviews. Thus, this review characterises the nature of medical education scoping reviews to identify areas for improvement and highlight future research opportunities.

METHOD

The authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1/1999 and 4/2020 in 14 medical education journals. The authors extracted and summarised key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR. Rationales and research questions were mapped to Arksey and O'Malley's reasons for conducting a scoping review.

RESULTS

One hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average, 10.1 scoping reviews (SD = 13.1, median = 4) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n = 42). Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews; the most prevalent being to summarise and disseminate research findings (n = 77). In 11 reviews, the rationales for the scoping review and the research questions aligned. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with few authors publishing a protocol (n = 2) or including stakeholders (n = 20). Authors identified shortcomings of scoping reviews, including lack of critical appraisal.

CONCLUSIONS

Scoping reviews are increasingly conducted in medical education and published by most core journals. Scoping reviews aim to map the depth and breadth of emerging topics; as such, they have the potential to play a critical role in the practice, policy and research of medical education. However, these results suggest improvements are needed for this role to be fully realised.

Reflections of mentors and mentees on a national mentoring programme for pharmacists in the United Kingdom: An examination into organisational culture and systems

BACKGROUND

There is no accepted or consistent model for delivering mentoring programmes, manifesting in some debate surrounding the ideal conducive system. Mentorship structures and culture within pharmacy can be advanced by researching experiences of mentors and mentees.

OBJECTIVE

To explore lived experiences of participants in a nationwide mentoring programme in relation to motivations and barriers associated with engaging with mentoring, and what system changes and organisational culture shift could further support mentoring for pharmacy professionals.

METHODS

This study adopted a constructivist research paradigm, with a qualitative design to focus on how participants interpreted the world and their experiences. Verbatim transcripts of recordings were examined using deductive and inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants in twenty one-to-one interviews appreciated the programme's allowance for organic relationships to occur, its contribution towards advancing the profession forward, its flexibility, and available resources. They discussed training needs and a more formal onboarding process into the programme that facilitated greater awareness of resources, as well as the need to evaluate and tweak it. System changes were highlighted so that mentoring can be part of the organisational culture, such as incorporating mentoring in job descriptions to increase capacity, senior members of the profession acting as role models, and linking mentoring to existing education and development structures.

CONCLUSION

Data demonstrated the need for formal structure but that which allowed for informal and organic relationships to develop. It is paramount for sponsoring organisations to provide resources and continuously monitor the program. The rich information gathered on administrative support and structure of a mentoring programme, along with its organisational facets, should help organisations when implementing similar initiatives. An organisation sponsoring or administering a mentoring programme must take actions that help codify its mentoring culture and its advocacy of mentoring as key to advancement for its profession's members.

Analysis of the MUII-plus mentorship programme: reflections of Fellows’ experiences and lessons for other programmes

Background: The MUII mentorship programme began 11 years ago with a successful group mentorship model. Over the years, the programme has evolved and is presently anchored on the “GROW” approach. This model allows individuals to: set Goals (What I want?); Reflect (Where am I now?); think of Options (What can I do?); What to implement (my actions?). It is intended to help fellows (current, honorary, alumni) herein referred to as mentees achieve their short, medium, and long-term research, career and professional goals. Methods: A mixed methods study combining a cross-sectional survey, one focus group discussion and 11 in-depth key informant interviews were carried out between November 2018 and January 2019 to 1) assess the status of the mentorship programme, 2) perform a strength weakness opportunity and threats (SWOT) analysis, and 3) identify factors relevant for sustainability. Results: An open invitation was made to 52 fellows to participate in the survey, and 23 responded. Among respondents, the largest proportions were male [70% (16/23)], and PhD fellows [35% (8/23)]. The respondents rated the fellowship experience as excellent [65% (15/23)], and most [78% (18/23)] revealed they had benefitted greatly from the programme. The SWOT analysis revealed outstanding strengths of having regular fellows’ meetings for peer support, and availability of international collaborations, linkages and exposure. Opportunities identified included large pool of mentees within MUII-plus and evidence of fellows taking up leadership positions. The biggest threat to the mentorship programme was the busy schedule of mentors. Conclusions: The MUII-plus mentorship programme has strong potential to offer research and career mentorship to its fellows. To promote sustainability of the programme, there is a need for innovative ways to engage mentors; such as digital platforms (e-mentorship) for greater mentor-mentee interactions.

Participant perspectives on a seminar-based research career development program and its role in career independence

Health science researchers need training and support to effectively pursue independence in their research careers. Little data exist regarding the specific resources that faculty researchers have found or would find useful. In this study, we aimed to better understand the needs of health science researchers to develop recommendations for effective career development programming. The authors conducted a multi-method evaluation of early-career researcher faculty needs beginning by using post-session satisfaction surveys to assess the value of a long-standing "K-Club" seminar, which educates and supports those pursuing NIH Career Development (K) awards or similar. The authors then collected in-depth views on career development needs through a series of focus groups conducted with health science researchers at three career stages: early career, award-seeking junior faculty; mid-career faculty who have obtained some extramural funding; senior faculty who serve as mentors for early/mid-career faculty. Participants who attended the existing K-Club strongly endorse the program in supporting their career goals. Focus group participants described specific areas for program expansion that would add value across career stages: more flexible training options, conducted in smaller group settings with immediate feedback provided; more formalized training and resources for senior research mentors; in-depth guidance on individualized grantsmanship. The authors propose program development guidelines for helping researchers achieve research independence and success. Findings indicate that a broad-reaching K-Club style educational seminar can serve as a valuable foundation supporting professional development. The addition of tailored programs delivered across diverse platforms are predicted to heighten career development success.

A systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of interprofessional mentoring in medicine from 2000 to 2019

Interprofessional mentoring in palliative care sees different members of the interprofessional team providing holistic, personalised andlongitudinal mentoring support, skills training and knowledge transfer as they mentor trainees at different points along their mentoring journeys. However, gaps in practice and their risk of potential mentoring malpractice even as interprofessional mentoring use continues to grow in palliative medicine underlines the need for careful scrutiny of its characteristics and constituents in order to enhance the design, evaluation and oversight of interprofessional mentoring programmes. Hence, a systematic scoping review on prevailing accounts of interprofessional mentoring in medicine is conducted to address this gap. Using Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews and identical search strategies, 6 reviewers performed independent literature reviews of accounts of interprofessional mentoring published in 10 databases. Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis approach was adopted to evaluate across different mentoring settings. A total of 11111 abstracts were identified from 10 databases, 103 full-text articles reviewed and 14 full-text articles were thematically analysed to reveal 4 themes: characterizing, implementing, evaluating and obstacles to interprofessional mentoring. Interprofessional mentoring is founded upon a respectful and collaborative mentoring relationship that thrives despite inevitable differences in individual values, ethical perspectives at different career stages within diverse working environments. This warrants effective mentor-mentee trainings, alignment of expectations, roles and responsibilities, goals and timelines, and effective oversight of the programmes. Drawing upon the data provided, an interprofessional mentoring framework is forwarded to guide the design, evaluation and oversight of the programmes.

Peers United in Leadership & Skills Enhancement: A near-peer mentoring program for medical students

Implication Statement  We created a near peer mentoring program in pre-clerkship, which gave medical students the opportunity to work together, teach others, and practice their clinical skills. It uniquely connects first year “learner-mentees” and second year “instructor-mentors” in semi-structured learning environments, from October to April. Beyond supporting intrinsic motivation, skills development, and collaboration, students gained experience in teaching; an important skill for physicians.

Analysis of the MUII-plus mentorship programme: reflections of Fellows’ experiences and lessons for other programmes

Background: The MUII mentorship programme began 11 years ago with a successful group mentorship model. Over the years, the programme has evolved and is presently anchored on the “GROW” approach. This model allows individuals to: set Goals (What I want?); Reflect (Where am I now?); think of Options (What can I do?); What to implement (my actions?). It is intended to help fellows (current, honorary, alumni) herein referred to as mentees achieve their short, medium, and long-term research, career and professional goals. Methods: A mixed methods study combining a cross-sectional survey, one focus group discussion and 11 in-depth key informant interviews were carried out between November 2018 and January 2019 to 1) assess the status of the mentorship programme, 2) perform a strength weakness opportunity and threats (SWOT) analysis, and 3) identify factors relevant for sustainability. Results: An open invitation was made to 52 fellows to participate in the survey, and 23 responded. Among respondents, the largest proportions were male [70% (16/23)], and PhD fellows [35% (8/23)]. The respondents rated the fellowship experience as excellent [65% (15/23)], and most [78% (18/23)] revealed they had benefitted greatly from the programme. The SWOT analysis revealed outstanding strengths of having regular fellows’ meetings for peer support, and availability of international collaborations, linkages and exposure. Opportunities identified included large pool of mentees within MUII-plus and evidence of fellows taking up leadership positions. The biggest threat to the mentorship programme was the busy schedule of mentors. Conclusions: The MUII-plus mentorship programme has strong potential to offer research and career mentorship to its fellows. To promote sustainability of the programme, there is a need for innovative ways to engage mentors; such as digital platforms (e-mentorship) for greater mentor-mentee interactions.

Combined novice, near-peer, e-mentoring palliative medicine program: A mixed method study in Singapore

INTRODUCTION

An acute shortage of senior mentors saw the Palliative Medicine Initiative (PMI) combine its novice mentoring program with electronic and peer mentoring to overcome insufficient mentoring support of medical students and junior doctors by senior clinicians. A three-phased evaluation was carried out to evaluate mentees' experiences within the new CNEP mentoring program.

METHODS

Phase 1 saw use of a Delphi process to create a content-valid questionnaire from data drawn from 9 systematic reviews of key aspects of novice mentoring. In Phase 2 Cognitive Interviews were used to evaluate the tool. The tool was then piloted amongst mentees in the CNEP program. Phase 3 compared mentee's experiences in the CNEP program with those from the PMI's novice mentoring program.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of open-ended responses revealed three themes-the CNEP mentoring process, its benefits and challenges that expound on the descriptive statistical analysis of specific close-ended and Likert scale responses of the survey. The results show mentee experiences in the PMI's novice mentoring program and the CNEP program to be similar and that the addition of near peer and e-mentoring processes enhance communications and support of mentees.

CONCLUSION

CNEP mentoring is an evolved form of novice mentoring built on a consistent mentoring approach supported by an effective host organization. The host organization marshals assessment, support and oversight of the program and allows flexibility within the approach to meet the particular needs of mentees, mentors and senior mentors. Whilst near-peer mentors and e-mentoring can make up for the lack of senior mentor availability, their effectiveness hinges upon a common mentoring approach. To better support the CNEP program deeper understanding of the mentoring dynamics, policing and mentor and mentee training processes are required. The CNEP mentoring tool too needs to be validated.

A systematic scoping review of ethical issues in mentoring in internal medicine, family medicine and academic medicine

Mentoring's role in medical education is threatened by the potential abuse of mentoring relationships. Particularly affected are mentoring relationships between senior clinicians and junior doctors which lie at the heart of mentoring. To better understand and address these concerns, a systematic scoping review into prevailing accounts of ethical issues and professional lapses in mentoring is undertaken. Arksey and O'Malley's (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19-32, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was employed to explore the scope of ethical concerns in mentoring in general medicine. Databases searcheed included PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, Embase, Scopus, Mednar and OpenGrey. 3391 abstracts were identified from the initialy search after removal of duplicates, 412 full-text articles were reviewed, 98 articles were included and thematically analysed. Unsatisfactory matching, misaligned expectations, inadequate mentor training, cursory codes of conduct, sketchy standards of practice, meagre oversight and unstructured processes have been identified as potential causes for ethical and professional breaches in mentoring practice. Changes in how professionalism is viewed suggest further studies of educational culture should also be carried out. The host organization plays a major role in establishing codes of conduct, expectations, and holistically, longitudinally oversight of the mentoring process and mentoring relationships.

Enhancing mentoring experiences through e-mentoring: a systematic scoping review of e-mentoring programs between 2000 and 2017

Mentoring is suffering from a shortage of trained mentors which compromise the efficacy of novice mentoring or mentoring between a senior clinician and a junior clinician. E-mentoring is proposed as a means of supplementing this dominant form of mentoring in medicine by providing accessible, timely and longitudinal support for mentees. However, with little is known about e-mentoring nor its role in a blended mentoring approach, a systematic scoping review is proposed to evaluate these gaps in understanding in order to better understand e-mentoring and assess the viability of employing e-mentoring practice to support novice mentoring. Using Arksey and O'Malley's (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19-32, 2005) approach, 5 reviewers carried out independent literature reviews of e-mentoring as an adjuvant to novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Google Scholar, Scopus, GreyLit, OpenGrey, and Web of Science databases. Braun and Clarke's (Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77-101, 2006) thematic analysis approach was used to thematically analyse accounts of e-mentoring across different settings. 6557 abstracts were identified, 109 full text articles were reviewed, and 18 articles were included and thematically analysed. The themes identified include definitions, role, stages, processes, platforms, evaluation, and relationships in e-mentoring. The themes identified provide a clinically relevant definition of e-mentoring, and in highlighting the similarities in the phases of novice and e-mentoring reaffirms the validity of a blended approach as a means of addressing shortfalls in mentoring in medicine.

Enhancing Mentoring in Palliative Care: An Evidence Based Mentoring Framework

BACKGROUND

Growing concerns over ethical issues in mentoring in medicine and surgery have hindered efforts to reinitiate mentoring for Palliative Care (PC) physicians following the easing of COVID-19 restrictions. Ranging from the misappropriation of mentee's work to bullying, ethical issues in mentoring are attributed to poor understanding and structuring of mentoring programs, underlining the need for a consistent approach to mentoring practices.

METHODS

Given diverse practices across different settings and the employ of various methodologies, a novel approach to narrative reviews (NR)s is proposed to summarize, interpret, and critique prevailing data on novice mentoring. To overcome prevailing concerns surrounding the reproducibility and transparency of narrative reviews, the Systematic Evidenced Based Approach (SEBA) adopts a structured approach to searching and summarizing the included articles and employed concurrent content and thematic analysis that was overseen by a team of experts.

RESULTS

A total of 18 915 abstracts were reviewed, 62 full text articles evaluated and 41 articles included. Ten themes/categories were ascertained identified including Nature; Stakeholders; Relationship; Approach; Environment; Benefits; Barriers; Assessments; Theories and Definitions.

CONCLUSION

By compiling and scrutinizing prevailing practice it is possible to appreciate the notion of the mentoring ecosystem which sees each mentee, mentor, and host organization brings with them their own microenvironment that contains their respective goals, abilities, and contextual considerations. Built around competency based mentoring stages, it is possible to advance a flexible yet consistent novice mentoring framework.

Structuring Mentoring in Medicine and Surgery. A Systematic Scoping Review of Mentoring Programs Between 2000 and 2019

INTRODUCTION

Evidence of novice mentoring's successes in having senior clinicians support junior doctors and/or medical students in their clinical, academic, and research goals has spurred efforts to include mentoring in the core medical curriculum. However, lack of effective structuring threatens the viability of mentoring programs, precipitating ethical concerns about mentoring. This review aims to answer the question "what is known about mentoring structures in novice mentoring among medical students and junior doctors in medicine and surgery postings?," which will guide the design of a consistent structure to novice mentoring.

METHODS

Levac (2010)'s framework was used to guide this systematic scoping review of mentoring programs in medicine and surgery published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019 in PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, Embase, Scopus, Mednar, and OpenGrey. A "split approach" involving concurrent independent use of a directed content analysis and thematic approach was used to analyze included articles.

RESULTS

Three thousand three hundred ninety-five abstracts were identified. There was concordance between the 3 themes and categories identified in analyzing the 71 included articles. These were the host organization, mentoring stages, and evaluations.

CONCLUSION

The data reveal the need for balance between ensuring consistency and flexibility to meet the individual needs of stakeholders throughout the stages of the mentoring process. The Generic Mentoring Framework provides a structured approach to "balancing" flexibility and consistency in mentoring processes. The Generic Mentoring Framework is reliant upon appropriate, holistic, and longitudinal assessments of the mentoring process to guide adaptations to mentoring processes and ensure effective support and oversight of the program.

Perception of the study situation and mental burden during the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students with and without mentoring

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic changes in medical education and might affect students' mental health and perception of study conditions. Mentoring may have mediating effects by enhancing social support. The University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) offers a voluntary general mentoring program (g-mentoring) for all interested students and a mentoring program for students with excellent course results and scientific interest (e-mentoring) We aimed to investigate the mental burden and views of their study situation during COVID-19 among students who did or did not participate in one of the formal mentoring programs. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey (May 2020) examining students' mental burden using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), and assessing their perception of study conditions and digital teaching using self-developed items. Results: Of 1193 invited students, 543 (45.5%) completed the survey. 35% of those participated in the g-mentoring and 7% in the e-mentoring. 59% did not participate in any program. More e-mentees than g-mentees and nonparticipants reported clinically unproblematic levels of anxiety and depression symptoms. The majority of students (55%) was somewhat worried about the impact of the pandemic on their study situation. Regarding digital teaching students did not feel overburdened by the lack of a fixed schedule and structure, e-mentees even less than g-mentees and nonparticipants. Both g-mentees and nonparticipants were significantly more appreciative of the possible repeated use of the digital teaching materials than e-mentees (both groups M=5.7 vs. M=5.4 in e-mentees, p=.045). Conclusion: The results indicate that while students feel substantially burdened by the situation and the majority worries about the impact of the pandemic on their studies, they also seem to cope well with the digital course format. Study motivation during COVID-19 decreased among the majority of students with and without mentoring. These aspects may be important to address by medical schools interested in developing effective interventions to support students during a pandemic and continuous online teaching.

The Pivotal Role of Host Organizations in Enhancing Mentoring in Internal Medicine: A Scoping Review

In undergraduate and postgraduate medical education, mentoring offers personalized training and plays a key role in continuing medical education and the professional development of healthcare professionals. However, poor structuring of the mentoring process has been attributed to failings of the host organization and, as such, we have conducted a scoping review on the role of the host organization in mentoring programs. Guided by Levac et al's methodological framework and a combination of thematic and content analysis, this scoping review identifies their "defining" and secondary roles. Whilst the "defining" role of the host is to set standards, nurture, and oversee the mentoring processes and relationships, the secondary roles comprise of supporting patient care and specific responsibilities toward the mentee, mentor, program, and organization itself. Critically, striking a balance between structure and flexibility within the program is important to ensure consistency in the mentoring approach whilst accounting for the changing needs and goals of the mentees and mentors.

Educational roles as a continuum of mentoring's role in medicine - a systematic review and thematic analysis of educational studies from 2000 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have gone to great lengths to differentiate mentoring from teaching, tutoring, role modelling, coaching and supervision in efforts to better understand mentoring processes. This review seeks to evaluate the notion that teaching, tutoring, role modelling, coaching and supervision may in fact all be part of the mentoring process. To evaluate this theory, this review scrutinizes current literature on teaching, tutoring, role modelling, coaching and supervision to evaluate their commonalities with prevailing concepts of novice mentoring.

METHODS

A three staged approach is adopted to evaluate this premise. Stage one involves four systematic reviews on one-to-one learning interactions in teaching, tutoring, role modelling, coaching and supervision within Internal Medicine, published between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2018. Braun and Clarke's (2006) approach to thematic analysis was used to identify key elements within these approaches and facilitate comparisons between them. Stage two provides an updated view of one-to-one mentoring between a senior physician and a medical student or junior doctor to contextualise the discussion. Stage three infuses mentoring into the findings delineated in stage one.

RESULTS

Seventeen thousand four hundred ninety-nine citations were reviewed, 235 full-text articles were reviewed, and 104 articles were thematically analysed. Four themes were identified - characteristics, processes, nature of relationship, and problems faced in each of the four educational roles.

CONCLUSIONS

Role modelling, teaching and tutoring, coaching and supervision lie within a mentoring spectrum of increasingly structured interactions, assisted by assessments, feedback and personalised support that culminate with a mentoring approach. Still requiring validation, these findings necessitate a reconceptualization of mentoring and changes to mentor training programs and how mentoring is assessed and supported.

The role of reverse mentoring in medical education: current insights

Reverse mentoring is a relatively contemporary concept that relies on the reversal of the traditional roles of mentor and mentee and the abolition of the mentorship model as an apprenticeship or hierarchy. Typically, a younger specialist takes on the role of mentor and an older, more experienced specialist the role of mentee. Reverse mentoring is founded in learning and social theories of mentorship and has been practically applied in information technology, business and education fields. However, there is a role for reverse mentoring in medical education and the health sciences, particularly with the inclusion of new technologies in a changing health landscape, and the emphasis on interdisciplinary teamwork and improved workplace culture. Further investigation and analysis of reverse mentoring is warranted, with a particular focus on the implementation of the reverse mentor model in the field of medical education and the health sciences. To assist those considering implementation of mentorship programs in their workplace, this article provides an overview of recent literature, with suggested applications of "reverse mentoring" in the medical education context.

Mentoring stages: A study of undergraduate mentoring in palliative medicine in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Mentoring nurtures a mentee's personal and professional development. Yet conflation of mentoring approaches and a failure to contend with mentoring's nature makes it difficult to study mentoring processes and relationships. This study aims to understand of mentee experiences in the Palliative Medicine Initiative (PMI). The PMI uses a consistent mentoring approach amongst a homogeneous mentee population offers a unique opportunity to circumnavigate conflation of practices and the limitations posed by mentoring's nature. The data will advance understanding of mentoring processes.

METHODS

Sixteen mentees discussed their PMI experiences in individual face-to-face audio-recorded interviews. The two themes identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts were the stages of mentoring and communication.

RESULTS

The 6 stages of mentoring are the 'pre-mentoring stage', 'initial research meetings', 'data gathering', 'review of initial findings, 'manuscript preparation" and 'reflections'. These subthemes sketch the progression of mentees from being dependent on the mentor for support and guidance, to an independent learner with capacity and willingness to mentor others. Each subtheme is described as stages in the mentoring process (mentoring stages) given their association with a specific phase of the research process. Mentoring processes also pivot on effective communication which are influenced by the mentor's characteristics and the nature of mentoring interactions.

CONCLUSION

Mentoring relationships evolve in stages to ensure particular competencies are met before mentees progress to the next part of their mentoring process. Progress is dependent upon effective communication and support from the mentor and appropriate and timely adaptations to the mentoring approach to meet the mentee's needs and goals. Adaptations to the mentoring structure are informed by effective and holistic evaluation of the mentoring process and the mentor's and mentee's abilities, goals and situations. These findings underline the need to review and redesign the way assessments of the mentoring process are constructed and how mentoring programs are structured.

A Systematic Scoping Review of Ethical Issues in Mentoring in Surgery

BACKGROUND

Mentoring is crucial to the growth and development of mentors, mentees, and host organisations. Yet, the process of mentoring in surgery is poorly understood and increasingly mired in ethical concerns that compromise the quality of mentorship and prevent mentors, mentees, and host organisations from maximising its full potential. A systematic scoping review was undertaken to map the ethical issues in surgical mentoring to enhance understanding, assessment, and guidance on ethical conduct.

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework was used to guide a systematic scoping review involving articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2018 in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Mednar, and OpenGrey databases. Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis approach was adopted to compare ethical issues in surgical mentoring across different settings, mentee and mentor populations, and host organisations.

RESULTS

A total of 3849 abstracts were identified, 464 full-text articles were retrieved, and 50 articles were included. The 3 themes concerned ethical lapses at the levels of mentor or mentee, mentoring relationships, and host organisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Mentoring abuse in surgery involves lapses in conduct, understanding of roles and responsibilities, poor alignment of expectations, and a lack of clear standards of practice. It is only with better structuring of mentoring processes and effective support of host organisation tasked with providing timely, longitudinal, and holistic assessment and oversight will surgical mentoring overcome prevailing ethical concerns surrounding it.