FACTORS FACILITATING EFFECTIVE PEER MENTORSHIP PROGRAMMES AMONG MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCE STUDENTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Main Article Content
Keywords
challenges, facilitating factors, mentorship programmes, nursing education, suggestions for improvement
Abstract
This systematic review synthesizes evidence from peer-reviewed studies to identify factors that facilitate effective mentorship programmes in nursing education, examine challenges hindering their implementation, and elicit suggestions for improvement. Drawing from a comprehensive search of databases including PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, 15 studies published between 2010 and 2024 were included after applying PRISMA guidelines and quality appraisal using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Key facilitating factors included structured programme design, mentor training, and institutional support, while challenges encompassed time constraints, mismatched mentor-mentee pairs, and resource limitations. Suggestions for enhancement emphasised integration of technology, ongoing evaluation, and cultural adaptation. These findings underscore the need for tailored mentorship frameworks to enhance nursing students' wellbeing and academic performance. The review highlights gaps in low-resource settings like Nigeria and recommends policy reforms for standardised programmes.
References
2. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The future of nursing 2020–2030: Charting a path to achieve health equity. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2019. doi:10.17226/25982
3. Aston L, Hallam P. Successful mentoring in nursing: A review of the literature. Nurs Stand. 2013;27(48):35–40. doi:10.7748/ns2013.07.27.48.35.e7702
4. Burgess A, van Diggele C, Mellis C. Mentorship in the health professions: A review. Clin Teach. 2018;15(3):197–202. doi:10.1111/tct.12756
5. Andersen T, Watkins K. The value of peer mentoring in nursing education: A systematic review. J Nurs Educ. 2018;57(4):217–224. doi:10.3928/01484834-20180322-05
6. Dixon E, Pannu J, Dhaliwal K, Cheng R, Deol G, Frangos S, Tawil E, Oliveira A, Wojkowski S, Quach S. Effects of interprofessional education on readiness for interprofessional learning in rehabilitation science students from professional health care programs: protocol for a systematic review. JMIR Res Protoc. 2024;13:e60830. doi:10.2196/60830.
7. Haqqee Z, Hassan S, Awan A. Academic stress and coping strategies among nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;88:104387. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104387
8. Reverté-Villarroya S, Ortega L, Raigal-Aran L, Siles-González J. Emotional wellbeing and stress among nursing students: A systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;97:104706. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104706
9. Harrison R, Hurst C, Bailey J. Peer mentoring and student wellbeing in undergraduate nursing programmes. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022;59:103295. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103295
10. Rickel JW, Chaparro C. Peer mentoring and academic success in undergraduate nursing education. J Prof Nurs. 2021;37(2):291–297. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.11.006
11. Austin Z, Halpin Y. Mentorship and professional identity development in health professions education. Med Teach. 2021;43(2):141–147. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2020.1834741
12. Ipinnimo TM, Akinwale OE, Olatunji AO. Nursing education challenges and workforce migration in Nigeria. Afr J Health Prof Educ. 2023;15(2):89–95.
13. Lawal AM, Balogun JA, Olatunji BO. Human resource constraints in Nigerian nursing education institutions. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2022;17:100462. doi:10.1016/j.ijans.2022.100462
14. Kolawole OM, Adegoke TG, Adejumo PO. Peer mentoring and academic adjustment among nursing students in Nigeria. Niger J Nurs Sci. 2019;6(1):45–53.
15. Ughasoro MD, Onwujekwe OE, Nwoke EA. Mentorship challenges and nursing student support systems in Nigeria. BMC Nurs. 2022;21:184. doi:10.1186/s12912-022-00945-3
16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71
17. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
18. Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Adelaide: Joanna Briggs Institute; 2020. doi:10.46658/JBIMES-20-01
19. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2022. doi:10.1002/9781119536604
20. Aromataris E, Pearson A. The systematic review: An overview. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):53–58. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000444496.24228.2c
21. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence. BMJ. 2005;331(7524):1064–1065. doi:10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
22. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). CASP qualitative research checklist. Oxford: CASP; 2018. Available from: https://casp-uk.net
23. Joanna Briggs Institute. JBI critical appraisal tools. Adelaide: JBI; 2020. Available from: https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools
24. Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, et al. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Educ Inf. 2018;34(4):285–291. doi:10.3233/EFI-180221
25. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:45. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

