Author:
Teo Mac Yu Kai,Ibrahim Halah,Lin Casper Keegan Ronggui,Hamid Nur Amira Binte Abdul,Govindasamy Ranitha,Somasundaram Nagavalli,Lim Crystal,Goh Jia Ling,Zhou Yi,Tay Kuang Teck,Ong Ryan Rui Song,Tan Vanessa,Toh Youru,Pisupati Anushka,Raveendran Vijayprasanth,Chua Keith Zi Yuan,Quah Elaine Li Ying,Sivakumar Jeevasuba,Senthilkumar Samyuktha Dhanalakshmi,Suresh Keerthana,Loo Wesley Teck Wee,Wong Ruth Si Man,Pei Yiying,Sng Julia Huina,Quek Simone Qian Min,Owyong Jasmine Lerk Juan,Yeoh Ting Ting,Ong Eng Koon,Phua Gillian Li Gek,Mason Stephen,Hill Ruaraidh,Chowdhury Anupama Roy,Ong Simon Yew Kuang,Krishna Lalit Kumar Radha
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Effective mentorship is an important component of medical education with benefits to all stakeholders. In recent years, conceptualization of mentorship has gone beyond the traditional dyadic experienced mentor-novice mentee relationship to include group and peer mentoring. Existing theories of mentorship do not recognize mentoring’s personalized, evolving, goal-driven, and context-specific nature. Evidencing the limitations of traditional cause-and-effect concepts, the purpose of this review was to systematically search the literature to determine if mentoring can be viewed as a complex adaptive system (CAS).
Methods
A systematic scoping review using Krishna’s Systematic Evidence-Based Approach was employed to study medical student and resident accounts of mentoring and CAS in general internal medicine and related subspecialties in articles published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2023 in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases. The included articles underwent thematic and content analysis, with the themes identified and combined to create domains, which framed the discussion.
Results
Of 5,704 abstracts reviewed, 134 full-text articles were evaluated, and 216 articles were included. The domains described how mentoring relationships and mentoring approaches embody characteristics of CAS and that mentorship often behaves as a community of practice (CoP). Mentoring’s CAS-like features are displayed through CoPs, with distinct boundaries, a spiral mentoring trajectory, and longitudinal mentoring support and assessment processes.
Conclusion
Recognizing mentorship as a CAS demands the rethinking of the design, support, assessment, and oversight of mentorship and the role of mentors. Further study is required to better assess the mentoring process and to provide optimal training and support to mentors.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC