72. Evaluatation of an innovative mentorship program - Multilevel mentorship model - Does it meet the needs of residents?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The UBC community medicine mentorship program was established in 2003 and is continually evaluated. In response to resident feedback, we developed an innovative mentorship model that involves mentorship of junior residents by both mentors from the professional community and senior residents. This new multilevel mentorship model (MMM) was implemented in 2005. It was evaluated for its ability to (1) foster professional and personal relationships among mentors and mentees, (2) help residents develop career goals and (3) support residents who were having challenges in the program. The program was evaluated using an on-line survey, with both Likert scale and short-answer responses. The survey was completed by 10/13 (77%) residents, 7/13 (54%) community medicine professionals (CMPs). For the first level, CMP-resident mentorship, 9/10 residents and 5/7 CMPs agreed that a positive relationship was maintained, and that they benefited from the relationship; 8/10 residents agreed that career counseling occurred. Two of the three residents who had conflict in the program felt that they were supported by their CMP mentor. Mentorship was a positive experience even for two residents who left the program. For the second level, senior-junior resident mentorship, all relationships started within the first month of the program and all residents agreed that a positive relationship was maintained throughout the year. Career counseling occurred in 2/3 junior-senior resident pairs. All three residents agreed that their resident mentor supported them during a conflict. Several resident- and CMP-mentors described heightened awareness of issues that residents face in training. The multilevel mentorship model has considerable potential for fostering mentoring relationships, career planning, and helping residents overcome the challenges of residency. Barondess JA. Mentoring in biomedicine. J Lab Clin Med 1197; 129:487-91. Jackson VA, Palepu A, Szalacha L, Caswell C, Carr PL, Inui T. “Having the right chemistry”: a qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine. Acad Med 2003; 78:328-334. Williams LL, Levine JB, Malhotra S, Holtzheimer P. The good-enough mentoring relationship. Academic Psychiatry 2004; 28:111-115.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".