Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mentorship in the health professions: a review

Burgess, Annette, van Diggele, Christie, Mellis, Craig·2018·The Clinical Teacher

Abstract

Summary: Background: The importance of mentorship within health care training is well recognised. It offers a means to further enhance workforce performance and engagement, promote learning opportunities and encourage multidisciplinary collaboration. There are both career and life benefits associated with mentorship, and it is increasingly recognised as a bidirectional process that benefits both mentors and mentees. Recently, mentoring has been considered an essential step in professional and personal development, particularly in the field of health care. Literature: This article provides a review of the recent literature to assist those considering the implementation of mentorship programmes within their institutions. Discussion includes topics relating to the key elements of effective mentorship, the various phases and styles of mentorship, the need for career‐long mentoring, ethical issues and potential difficulties in mentorship. Take‐home message: Learning within the workplace includes the development of knowledge and skills, and an understanding of the values important to the profession and the culture of organisations. Within health care training, organisations may encompass hospitals, universities, training organisations and regulatory bodies. The practice of mentorship may help to foster an understanding of the enduring elements of practice within these organisations. Mentoring involves both a coaching and an educational role, requiring a generosity of time, empathy, a willingness to share knowledge and skills, and an enthusiasm for teaching and the success of others. Being mentored is believed to have an important influence on personal development, career guidance and career choice. Ethical issues and potential difficulties in mentorship include conflict of interest, imbalance of power and unrealistic expectations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/tct.12756

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Ridout S, 2006, Mentoring: guided by the light, PT Magazine, 14, 42
  2. 10.1002/9781119180449 · doi:10.1002/9781119180449
  3. Straus SE, 2014, Mentorship in academic medicine
  4. Abiddin NZ, 2006, Mentoring and Coaching: The Roles and Practices, The Journal of Human Resources and Adult Learning, 107
  5. 10.1080/J003v20n01_01 · doi:10.1080/j003v20n01_01
  6. Kilgallon K, 2012, Mentoring in Nursing and Healthcare: A Practical Approach
  7. 10.1136/bmj.332.7535.s38 · doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7535.s38
  8. 10.1136/pgmj.2006.054155 · doi:10.1136/pgmj.2006.054155
  9. 10.1177/1523422305279689 · doi:10.1177/1523422305279689

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Burgess, A., van Diggele, C., & Mellis, C.
Venue
The Clinical Teacher
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-01-10
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
197-202
ISSN
  • 1743-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-498X
OpenAlex
W2783672134
Cited by
406
References
9
FWCI
29.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mentorship in the health professions: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/tct.12756
The paper
Burgess, A., van Diggele, C., & Mellis, C. (2018). Mentorship in the health professions: a review. The Clinical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12756

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.