MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305674855 · doi:10.20381/ruor-4751

Mentoring as a Knowledge Translation Intervention to Inform Clinical Practice: A Multi-Methods Study

2015· dissertation· en· W2305674855 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ghadah Abdullah

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLKnowledge translationPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Health careMedicineInterpersonal communicationMEDLINEPsychologyNursingFamily medicineKnowledge managementSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mentoring is an intervention for implementing evidence into practice, but little is known about this intervention. The overall aim of this dissertation was to examine mentoring as a knowledge translation (KT) intervention to inform clinical practice. Methods: 1) A systematic review was used to determine the effectiveness of mentoring as a KT intervention. 2) An interpretive descriptive qualitative study was conducted to explore the use of mentoring in the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario’s Best Practice Guidelines Implementation/ Knowledge Transfer Fellowship program. Findings: 1) Of 10,669 citations from 1988 to 2012, 10 studies were eligible. Findings showed that mentoring alone (n = 1 study) improved one behavioral outcome. When mentoring was used as part of a multi-faceted intervention (n = 9), there were various effects on knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, use of research evidence in clinical practice, and the impacts on healthcare professionals, patients and organizations. 2) Qualitative interviews with 6 fellows, 8 mentors and 4 program leaders revealed that mentoring involved building relationships, establishing a learning plan, and using teaching and learning activities. Mentors were described as accessible, dedicated, and having expertise; fellows were described as dedicated, self-directed, and having mixed levels of expertise. Mentoring was described as positively impacting upon mentoring relationships, fellows, mentors, and organizations. Participants reported no negative outcomes. Conclusion: Mentoring was used as a KT intervention to support the implementation of evidence into clinical practice. The systematic review and qualitative study findings informed the Mentoring for Guideline Implementation model. Mentoring involved mentees selecting more experienced mentors who provided individualized support based on mentees’ learning needs, which resulted in mutual benefits for mentees and mentors. Future research is required to validate this new mentoring model, develop an instrument to measure the mentor-mentee relationship, and evaluate the effectiveness of mentoring as a KT intervention for guideline implementation in nursing.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.414
GPT teacher head0.626
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207