Explore the vast range of titles available.

An interview with Bryce Grame of Montana State University is presented. Among other things, Grame shares how ITE's Mentoring Program helped him.

Mentoring is suffering from a shortage of trained mentors which compromise the efficacy of novice mentoring or mentoring between a senior clinician and a junior clinician. E-mentoring is proposed as a means of supplementing this dominant form of mentoring in medicine by providing accessible, timely and longitudinal support for mentees. However, with little is known about e-mentoring nor its role in a blended mentoring approach, a systematic scoping review is proposed to evaluate these gaps in understanding in order to better understand e-mentoring and assess the viability of employing e-mentoring practice to support novice mentoring. Using Arksey and O’Malley’s (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19–32, 2005 ) approach, 5 reviewers carried out independent literature reviews of e-mentoring as an adjuvant to novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Google Scholar, Scopus, GreyLit, OpenGrey, and Web of Science databases. Braun and Clarke’s (Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101, 2006 ) thematic analysis approach was used to thematically analyse accounts of e-mentoring across different settings. 6557 abstracts were identified, 109 full text articles were reviewed, and 18 articles were included and thematically analysed. The themes identified include definitions, role, stages, processes, platforms, evaluation, and relationships in e-mentoring. The themes identified provide a clinically relevant definition of e-mentoring, and in highlighting the similarities in the phases of novice and e-mentoring reaffirms the validity of a blended approach as a means of addressing shortfalls in mentoring in medicine.

Mentoring is a series of communication interactions over time that involve the exchange of experiences or accumulated knowledge between individuals in a relationship with the intent of assisting growth and developing capacity. More specifically, mentoring frequently occurs in dyads that provide developmental mentoring, career development, psychosocial support, and role modeling across a continuum of formal and informal mentoring relationships, including episodic interactions. Mentoring has a long history, from guidance documented in Homer’s “Odyssey” dating back to 700 BCE, to structured mentoring programs used by organizations such as the Big Brothers (founded in 1910). However, mentoring research did not gain widespread prevalence until the 1980s when mentoring was applied across various employment sectors. This entry encompasses international scholarly publications across disciplines such as communication, business, education, medicine, engineering, psychology, sociology, and more to identify and explain key mentoring concepts, provide a comprehensive summary of existing research findings, offer strategies for effective mentoring practices, and highlight future research directions.

Introduction The redeployment of mentors and restrictions on in-person face-to-face mentoring meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic has compromised mentoring efforts in Palliative Medicine (PM). Seeking to address these gaps, we evaluate the notion of a combined novice, peer-, near-peer and e-mentoring (CNEP) and interprofessional team-based mentoring (IPT) program. Methods A Systematic Evidence Based Approach (SEBA) guided systematic scoping review was carried out to study accounts of CNEP and IPT from articles published between 1st January 2000 and 28th February 2021. To enhance trustworthiness, concurrent thematic and content analysis of articles identified from structured database search using terms relating to interprofessional, virtual and peer or near-peer mentoring in medical education were employed to bring together the key elements within included articles. Results Fifteen thousand one hundred twenty one abstracts were reviewed, 557 full text articles were evaluated, and 92 articles were included. Four themes and categories were identified and combined using the SEBA’s Jigsaw and Funnelling Process to reveal 4 domains - characteristics, mentoring stages, assessment methods, and host organizations. These domains suggest that CNEP’s structured virtual and near-peer mentoring process complement IPT’s accessible and non-hierarchical approach under the oversight of the host organizations to create a robust mentoring program. Conclusion This systematic scoping review forwards an evidence-based framework to guide a CNEP-IPT program. At the same time, more research into the training and assessment methods of mentors, near peers and mentees, the dynamics of mentoring interactions and the longitudinal support of the mentoring relationships and programs should be carried out.

The path to success is rarely easy or direct, and good mentors are hard to find. In [this book], thirty leaders in diverse fields share their secrets to navigating the rocky road to the top, describing the obstacles they faced, the setbacks they endured, and the vital lessons they learned. They dispense not only essential and practical career advice, but also wisdom applicable to life in general.

Mobile health (mHealth) apps have the potential to increase smoking cessation, but little research has been conducted with Aboriginal communities in Australia. We conducted a pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability and explore the effectiveness of a novel mHealth app to assist Aboriginal people to quit smoking. A pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) and process evaluation comprising usage analytics data and in-depth interviews was conducted. Current Aboriginal smokers (>16 years old), who were willing to make a quit attempt in the next month, were recruited from Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services and a government telephone coaching service. The intervention was a multifaceted Android or iOS app comprising a personalized profile and quit plan, text and in-app motivational messages, and a challenge feature allowing users to compete with others. The comparator was usual cessation support services. Outcome data collection and analysis were conducted blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was self-reported continuous smoking abstinence verified by carbon monoxide breath testing at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included point prevalence of abstinence and use of smoking cessation therapies and services. A total of 49 participants were recruited. Competing service delivery priorities, the lack of resources for research, and lack of support for randomization to a control group were the major recruitment barriers. At baseline, 23/49 (47%) of participants had tried to quit in recent weeks. At 6-month follow-up, only 1 participant (intervention arm) was abstinent. The process evaluation highlighted low to moderate app usage (3-10 new users per month and 4-8 returning users per month), an average of 2.9 sessions per user per month and 6.3 min per session. Key themes from interviews with intervention participants (n=15) included the following: (1) the powerful influence of prevailing social norms around acceptability of smoking; (2) high usage of mobile devices for phone, text, and social media but very low use of other smartphone apps; (3) the role of family and social group support in supporting quit attempts; and (4) low awareness and utilization of smoking cessation support services. Despite the broad acceptability of the app, participants also recommended technical improvements to improve functionality, greater customization of text messages, integration with existing social media platforms, and gamification features. Smoking cessation apps need to be integrated with commonly used functions of mobile phones and draw on social networks to support their use. Although they have the potential to increase utilization of cessation support services and treatments, more research is needed to identify optimal implementation models. Robust evaluation is critical to determine their impact; however, an RCT design may not be feasible in this setting. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001550493; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371792 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76TiV7HA6).