| Title |
Mentorship in anesthesia: a survey of perspectives among Canadian anesthesia residents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12630-017-0816-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzan Ergun, Jason W. Busse, Anne Wong |
| Abstract |
Mentorship is important for professional and academic growth; however, the role of mentorship in anesthesia is still being defined. We surveyed Canadian anesthesia residents to explore their perceptions of mentorship relationships. We administered a 20-item cross-sectional survey to program directors and anesthesia residents in all Canadian departments of anesthesia. Program directors were asked about their mentorship programs, and residents were asked about their perceptions of benefits and barriers to effective mentoring. Sixteen of 17 (94%) program directors and 189 of 585 (32%) anesthesia residents responded to our survey. While 143 of 180 (79%) residents agreed that mentorship was beneficial to overall success as an anesthesiologist, only 11 of 16 (69%) program directors reported formal mentorship as part of their residency program, and only 119 of 189 (63%) residents reported access to a mentor. Barriers reported by residents included insufficient time with mentors, lack of formalized meeting times and objectives, mentor-mentee incompatibility (personal or professional), and lack of resident choice in mentor selection. Our study confirms that, despite positive perceptions among residents, mentorship remains underutilized in anesthesia programs. We identify barriers to effective mentorship, including the need to consider resident choice as a means to improve formal anesthesia mentorship programs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 55% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 30% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,823,998
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#773
of 2,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,468
of 423,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#19
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 423,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.