House Allan, Dracup Naila, Burkinshaw Paula, Ward Vicky, Bryant Louise D
Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds School of Medicine, Leeds, UK.
Library (Allied Health and Social Care), University of Derby, Derby, UK.
BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 26;11(1):e040355. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040355.
Mentoring is frequently suggested as an intervention to address gender inequalities in the workplace.
To systematically review evidence published since a definitive review in 2006 on the effectiveness of mentoring interventions aimed at achieving gender equality in academic medicine.
Systematic Review, using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a template for data extraction and synthesis.
Studies were included if they described a specific mentoring intervention in a medical school or analogous academic healthcare organisation and included results from an evaluation of the intervention.
Mentoring was defined as (1) a formally organised intervention entailing a supportive relationship between a mentor, defined as a more senior/experienced person and a mentee defined as a more junior/inexperienced person; (2) mentoring intervention involved academic career support (3) the mentoring relationship was outside line management or supervision of performance and was defined by contact over an extended period of time.
The impact of mentoring was usually reported at the level of individual participants, for example, satisfaction and well-being or self-reported career progression. We sought evidence of impact on gender equality via reports of organisation-level effectiveness, of promotion or retention, pay and academic performance of female staff.
We identified 32 publications: 8 review articles, 20 primary observational studies and 4 randomised controlled trials. A further 19 discussed mentoring in relation to gender but did not meet our eligibility criteria. The terminology used, and the structures and processes reported as constituting mentoring, varied greatly. We identified that mentoring is popular with many who receive it; however, we found no robust evidence of effectiveness in reducing gender inequalities. Primary research used weak evaluation designs.
Mentoring is a complex intervention. Future evaluations should adopt standardised approaches used in applied health research to the design and evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
指导常被视为一种解决职场性别不平等问题的干预措施。
对2006年确定性综述以来发表的关于旨在实现学术医学领域性别平等的指导干预措施有效性的证据进行系统综述。
系统综述，使用干预描述与复制模板作为数据提取和综合的模板。
如果研究描述了医学院校或类似学术医疗组织中的特定指导干预措施，并包含干预措施评估结果，则纳入研究。
指导被定义为：（1）一种正式组织的干预措施，涉及导师（定义为更资深/经验更丰富的人）与学员（定义为更年轻/经验较少的人）之间的支持性关系；（2）指导干预措施涉及学术职业支持；（3）指导关系不在绩效的直线管理或监督范围内，且通过长时间的接触来定义。
指导的影响通常在个体参与者层面报告，例如满意度、幸福感或自我报告的职业发展。我们通过组织层面有效性、女性员工晋升或留用、薪酬和学术表现的报告来寻找对性别平等影响的证据。
我们确定了32篇出版物：8篇综述文章、20项初步观察性研究和4项随机对照试验。另外19篇文章讨论了与性别相关的指导，但未符合我们的纳入标准。所使用的术语以及被报告为构成指导的结构和过程差异很大。我们发现指导受到许多接受者的欢迎；然而，我们没有发现减少性别不平等有效性的有力证据。初步研究采用的评估设计薄弱。
指导是一种复杂的干预措施。未来的评估应采用应用健康研究中用于有效性和成本效益设计与评估的标准化方法。
