MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168702205 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v64i2.996

Developing, Implementing, and Evaluating a Formal Pharmacist Mentorship Program

2011· article· en· W2168702205 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Carmine Nieuwstraten, Alice Huh, Gwen Liu, Karen D. Davis, Lisa Dolovich

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMentorshipPharmacistFocus groupDocumentationMedical educationData collectionQualitative propertyMedicinePsychologyNursingFamily medicinePharmacyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mentoring is associated with positive professional and personal outcomes. However, there are few published data on mentoring programs for pharmacists.Objective: To develop and evaluate a mentorship program for hospital pharmacists that was implemented at St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, in Hamilton, Ontario, by identifying the benefits and challenges that participants experienced and determining whether the program provided the necessary skills for a successful mentoring relationship.Methods: A descriptive pilot study was performed between June 2007 and November 2008. Focus groups and self-administered questionnaires were conducted at two time points (after 3-4 months and at the end of the study period). The focus groups were conducted separately for mentors and mentees. Data were summarized by predefined categories. Quantitative data from the questionnaires were summarized as medians, minimums, and maximums, and qualitative survey data were transcribed and reviewed.Results: Three mentors were each paired with a mentee. The mentees identified an average of 4 learning objectives. All of the mentees reported improvements in their self-perceived level of competency and skill within the mentoring relationship and their confidence in their ability to perform the functions of a hospital pharmacist. The job satisfaction of both mentors and mentees improved. Reported challenges were related to scheduling and documentation. Mentors and mentees reported high levels of overall satisfaction with the program, at both of the evaluation time points. Participants spent less than 60 min/week each on mentoring activities.Conclusions: Both mentors and mentees benefited from the mentoring relationship.RÉSUMÉContexte : Le mentorat est associé à des résultats positifs sur le plan professionnel et personnel. Il existe toutefois peu de données sur des programmes de mentorat pour les pharmaciens.Objectif : Concevoir et évaluer un programme de mentorat pour les pharmaciens d'hôpitaux mis sur pied au St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, à Hamilton, en Ontario, en déterminant les avantages et les problèmes connus des participants et si le programme a conféré les compétences nécessaires à une relation de mentorat fonctionnelle.Méthodes : Une étude pilote descriptive a été menée entre juin 2007 et novembre 2008. Des groupes de discussion et des questionnaires autoadministrés ont été réalisés à deux moments (après 3-4 mois et à la fin de l'étude). Les groupes de discussion étaient distincts pour les mentors et pour les mentorés. Les données ont été résumées selon des catégories prédéfinies. Les données quantitatives issues des questionnaires ont été résumées selon des médianes, des minimums et des maximums, et les données qualitatives dégagées des enquêtes ont été transcrites et analysées.Résultats : Trois mentors ont été chacun appariés avec un mentoré. Les mentorés ont défini en moyenne quatre objectifs d'apprentissage. Tous les mentorés ont signalé des améliorations quant à leur perception de leur niveau de compétence et d'habileté dans le cadre de leur relation de mentorat et quant à leur confiance dans leur capacité à exécuter les tâches d'un pharmacien d'hôpital. Les mentors et les mentorés étaient également plus satisfaits de leur travail. Les problèmes signalés étaient liés aux horaires et à la documentation. Les mentors et les mentorés ont déclaré dans l'ensemble être très satisfaits du programme, aux deux moments d'évaluation. Chaque participant consacrait moins de 60 minutes par semaine à des activités de mentorat.Conclusions : Les mentors autant que les mentorés ont bénéficié de la relation de mentorat.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.164
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207