↓ Skip to main content

A survey of mentorship among Canadian anesthesiology residents

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
A survey of mentorship among Canadian anesthesiology residents
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12630-015-0418-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Zakus, Adrian W. Gelb, Alana M. Flexman

Abstract

Mentorship in medicine is associated with increased career satisfaction and personal development. Despite these benefits, little is known about mentorship in anesthesiology training programs. Our objectives were to determine (1) the prevalence of formal mentorship programs among anesthesiology training programs in Canada, (2) the prevalence of informal and formal mentorship among anesthesiology residents in Canada, and (3) the predictors of having an identified mentor among anesthesiology residents in Canada. We conducted a cross-sectional web-based survey of residents and program directors from Canadian anesthesiology residency programs. Program directors were questioned about formal mentorship programs, and residents were asked to provide demographic data and information about their mentorship relationships. We analyzed the relationship between resident characteristics and mentorship. Our survey response rates were 76% and 39% for the Program Director Survey and the Resident Survey, respectively. Formal mentorship programs were present in 54% of residency training programs, and 94% of residents agreed that mentorship was important. Seventy-four percent of residents identified at least one mentor, although 42% of these residents did not interact regularly with their mentor. Mentors and mentees were more likely to be of the same gender. If a formal mentorship program was present, residents were more likely to identify a mentor (82 vs 17%) and interact regularly with their mentor (70 vs 46%). Formal mentorship programs were present in half of anesthesiology training programs. Although 74% of the residents identified a mentor, 42% did not interact regularly with their mentor. The presence of a formal mentorship program was positively associated with mentorship.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 23%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 62%
Unknown 5 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#2,319
of 2,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,118
of 278,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 278,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.