Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Mentoring as an intervention to promote gender equality in academic medicine: a systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Author(s)

Allan House, Naila Dracup, Paula Burkinshaw, Vicky Ward, Louise D Bryant

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Background: Mentoring is frequently suggested as an intervention to address gender inequalities in the workplace. 
Objectives: To systematically review evidence published since a definitive review in 2006 on the effectiveness of mentoring interventions aimed at achieving gender equality in academic medicine. 
Design: Systematic Review, using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a template for data extraction and synthesis. 
Sample: Studies were included if they described a specific mentoring intervention in a medical school or analogous academic healthcare organisation and included results from an evaluation of the intervention. 
Eligibility criteria: Mentoring was defined as (1) a formally organised intervention entailing a supportive relationship between a mentor, defined as a more senior/experienced person and a mentee defined as a more junior/inexperienced person; (2) mentoring intervention involved academic career support (3) the mentoring relationship was outside line management or supervision of performance and was defined by contact over an extended period of time. 
Outcomes: The impact of mentoring was usually reported at the level of individual participants, for example, satisfaction and well-being or self-reported career progression. We sought evidence of impact on gender equality via reports of organisation-level effectiveness, of promotion or retention, pay and academic performance of female staff. 
Results: We identified 32 publications: 8 review articles, 20 primary observational studies and 4 randomised controlled trials. A further 19 discussed mentoring in relation to gender but did not meet our eligibility criteria. The terminology used, and the structures and processes reported as constituting mentoring, varied greatly. We identified that mentoring is popular with many who receive it; however, we found no robust evidence of effectiveness in reducing gender inequalities. Primary research used weak evaluation designs. 
Conclusions: Mentoring is a complex intervention. Future evaluations should adopt standardised approaches used in applied health research to the design and evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere040355
Number of pages11
JournalBMJ Open
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 26 Jan 2021

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Development of REsources based on reasonable adjustments to MAINstream diabetes and obesity care for adults with a learning disability: The REMAIN project

    Russell, A. M., Bryant, L., House, A., Ward, V., Stones, C. & Witty, K., Mar 2019, In: Diabetic Medicine. 36, S1, p. 112-112 1 p., P250.

    Research output: Contribution to journalAbstractpeer-review

  2. Using frameworks and models to support knowledge mobilization

    Ward, V., 2019, The Role of Knowledge Brokers in Education. Malin, J. & Brown, C. (eds.). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, p. 168-181

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

  3. Knowledge Translation: Key Concepts, Terms and Activities

    Rushmer, R., Ward, V., Nguyen, T. & Kuchenmüller, T., 2019, Population health monitoring: Climbing the information pyramid. Verschuuren, M. & van Oers, H. (eds.). Springer Nature, p. 127-150

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

  4. Creating and implementing local health and wellbeing policy: networks, interactions and collective knowledge creation amongst public sector managers

    Ward, V., Smith, S., Keen, J., West, R. & House, A., Aug 2018, In: Evidence & Policy. 14, 3, p. 477-498 22 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Related by journal

  1. Protocol for the development of the Wales multimorbidity e-Cohort (WMC): data sources and methods to construct a population-based research platform to investigate multi-morbidity

    Lyons, J., Akbari, A., Agrawal, U., Harper, G., Azcoaga-Lorenzo, A., Bailey, R., Rafferty, J., Watkins, A., Fry, R., McCowan, C., Dezateux, C., Robson, J. P., Peek, N., Holmes, C., Denaxas, S., Owen, R., Abrams, K. R., John, A., O'Reilly, D., Richardson, S. & 9 others, Hall, M., Gale, C. P., Davies, J., Davies, C., Cross, L., Gallacher, J., Chess, J., Brookes, A. J. & Lyons, R. A., Jan 2021, In: BMJ Open. 11, 1, 8 p., e047101.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

  2. What is the recovery rate and risk of long-term consequences following a diagnosis of COVID-19? A harmonised, global longitudinal observational study protocol

    Sigfrid, L., Cevik, M., Jesudason, E., Lim, W. S., Rello, J., Amuasi, J., Bozza, F., Palmieri, C., Munblit, D., Holter, J. C., Kildal, A. B., Reyes, L. F., Russell, C. D., Ho, A., Turtle, L., Drake, T. M., Beltrame, A., Hann, K., Bangura, I. R., Fowler, R. & 17 others, Lakoh, S., Berry, C., Lowe, D. J., McPeake, J., Hashmi, M., Dyrhol-Riise, A. M., Donohue, C., Plotkin, D., Hardwick, H., Elkheir, N., Lone, N. I., Docherty, A., Harrison, E., Baille, J. K., Carson, G., Semple, M. G. & Scott, J. T., Mar 2021, In: BMJ Open. 11, 3, 8 p., e043887.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

ID: 272794749

Top