Career Development of Academic Staff in Faculties of Dentistry by Means of Mentorship Programs: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.108 | 0.083 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.017 |
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".