Cited by 24Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutInnovations in Medical EducationCoaching Methods and Impact

“We’re all going through it”: impact of an online group coaching program for medical trainees: a qualitative analysis

Open access
Mann, Adrienne, Fainstad, Tyra, Shah, Pari, Dieujuste, Nathalie, Thurmon, Kerri, Dunbar, Kimiko, Jones, Christine·2022·BMC Medical Education

Abstract

Background: Trainees in graduate medical education are affected by burnout at disproportionate rates. Trainees experience tremendous growth in clinical skills and reasoning, however little time is dedicated to metacognition to process their experiences or deliberate identity formation to create individualized definitions of success and wellbeing. The purpose of this study was to understand the perspectives and experiences of trainees who participated in a 6-month, web-based, group coaching program for women residents in training. Methods: Better Together Physician Coaching is a six-month, self-paced, online, asynchronous, coaching program with multiple components including live coaching calls, unlimited written coaching, and self-study modules. Semi-structured interviews of seventeen participants of Better Together from twelve GME programs within a single institution in Colorado were conducted from May to June of 2021. All identified as women and had participated in a 6-month coaching program. Both inductive and deductive methods were used in collecting and analyzing the data with an aim to understand learners’ perceptions of the coaching program, including “how and why” the coaching program affected training experiences and wellbeing. Results: Three main themes emerged as benefits to the coaching program from the data: 1) practicing metacognition as a tool for healthy coping 2) building a sense of community, and 3) the value of a customizable experience. Conclusions: Female trainees who participated in a group coaching program expressed that they found value in learning how to cope with stressors through metacognition-focused coaching. They also described that building a community and being able to customize the experience were positive aspects of the program. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05280964. Date of registration: March 15th 2022. Retrospectively registered. URL of trial registry record.

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 · 10.1186/s12909-022-03729-5

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Personal growth is a resident/fellow outcome.

    “| Personal growth | Resident/fellow | [53,110] | |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Results (page not specified) describe residents reporting growth in self-compassion, a changed mindset, and improved relationships after group coaching. The study participants were residents; our copy does not establish personal growth as an outcome for fellows. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mann, A., Fainstad, T., Shah, P., Dieujuste, N., Thurmon, K., Dunbar, K., & Jones, C.
Affiliations
  • Veterans Health Administration (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • University of Denver (US)
  • Denver Health Medical Center (US)
  • Children's Hospital Colorado (US)
Corresponding author
  • Mann, Adrienne
  • Fainstad, Tyra
Venue
BMC Medical Education
Published
2022-09-13
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
675-675
ISSN
1472-6920 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4295761977
Cited by
24
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Coaching Methods and Impact
Keywords
physician burnout, graduate medical education, women residents, metacognition, stress coping, sense of community, well-being, identity construction
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Adaptation, Psychological, Burnout, Professional, Female, Health Status, Humans, Physicians

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