Assessing mentoring: A scoping review of mentoring assessment tools in internal medicine between 1990 and 2019
Open Access
- 8 May 2020
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 15 (5), e0232511
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232511
Abstract
Mentoring’s success in enhancing a mentee’s professional and personal development, and a host organisations’ reputation has been called into question, amidst a lack of effective tools to evaluate mentoring relationships and guide oversight of mentoring programs. A scoping review is proposed to map available literature on mentoring assessment tools in Internal Medicine to guide design of new tools. The review aims to explore how novice mentoring is assessed in Internal Medicine, including the domains assessed, and the strengths and limitations of the assessment methods. Guided by Levac et al.’s framework for scoping reviews, 12 reviewers conducted independent literature reviews of assessment tools in novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane, GreyLit, Web of Science, Open Dissertations and British Education Index databases. A ‘split approach’ saw research members adopting either Braun and Clarke’s approach to thematic analysis or directed content analysis to independently evaluate the data and improve validity and objectivity of the findings. 9662 abstracts were identified, 187 full-text articles reviewed, and 54 full-text articles included. There was consensus on the themes and categories identified through the use of the split approach, which were the domains assessed and methods of assessment. Most tools fail to contend with mentoring’s evolving nature and provide mere snap shots of the mentoring process largely from the mentee’s perspective. The lack of holistic, longitudinal and validated assessments propagate fears that ethical issues in mentoring are poorly recognized and addressed. To this end, we forward a framework for the design of ‘fit for purpose’ multi-dimensional tools.Keywords
This publication has 123 references indexed in Scilit:
- Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s frameworkBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2013
- More mentoring needed? A cross-sectional study of mentoring programs for medical students in GermanyBMC Medical Education, 2011
- Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived organizational supportJournal of Vocational Behavior, 2010
- Mentoring programs for medical students - a review of the PubMed literature 2000 - 2008BMC Medical Education, 2010
- A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research on the Meaning and Characteristics of Mentoring in Academic MedicineJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2009
- The qualitative content analysis processJournal of Advanced Nursing, 2008
- Mentoring at the University of Pennsylvania: Results of a Faculty SurveyJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2007
- Mentoring mattersJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2006
- Making sense of grounded theory in medical educationMedical Education, 2006
- Three Approaches to Qualitative Content AnalysisQualitative Health Research, 2005