4.2 Article

Surgical Mentors and Role Models: Prevalence, Importance and Associated Traits

期刊

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL EDUCATION
卷 69, 期 5, 页码 633-637

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2012.04.015

关键词

surgical role models; mentorship; surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Role models and mentors play an important part in attracting undergraduates into various medical specialties. However, little is known about the part played by role models and mentors in the context of surgery. The aim of this survey was to elucidate medical students' and surgical trainees' experiences of role models and to determine how mentoring works in practice. We also set out to identify traits associated with successful role models and mentors. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to senior undergraduate medical students in 1 medical school, and postgraduate surgical trainees (members of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASIT) in the UK and Ireland. The survey included questions about the availability of mentors and role models and explored mentorship process. RESULTS: A total of 163 medical students and 216 surgical trainees completed the questionnaire. While most medical students did not have a mentor, 52% (n = 104) of trainees reported having a surgical mentor. In both cases, mentoring was ill-structured and informal. While most medical students expressed a preference for a formal mentoring program, only 38% of surgical trainees expressed a preference for a more formal approach. Experiences of negative surgical role models were a pervasive feature for both medical student and surgical trainee respondents. DISCUSSION: This survey highlights a lack of a deliberate approach to mentoring in surgery and the presence of an excess of negative role models. It is, therefore, time for surgeons to pay much more attention to their roles as professional exemplars and mentors. (J Surg 69:633-637. (C) 2012 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据