Feasibility and Impact of a Student-Led, Semi-Structured, Near-Peer Student Guides Program on Navigating Through Medical School

• Published in: Medical science educator Vol. 30; no. 1; pp. 457 - 466
• Main Authors: Laurence, Colleen E., Jones, Jessie R., Stone, Shane N., Moses-Hampton, Malcolm, Yates, Samuel J., Khalil, Mario E., Callese, Tyler E., Kaye, Shaina P., Wirth, Scott H., Keskinyan, Vahakn S., Bentley, Paige G., Reynolds, Patrick S., Strowd, Roy E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01-03-2020
• Subjects: Education; Medical Education; Original Research; Guidance; Training; Development; Near-peer; Mentorship
• ISSN: 2156-8650; 2156-8650
• DOI: 10.1007/s40670-020-00929-w

Background
Mentorship is critical to developing health professionals. Near-peer mentorship pairs senior mentors with junior peers to help navigate academic, professional, and social aspects of training.
Methods
In this convergent parallel mixed methods study, we assessed the feasibility, usability, professional and social impact, and barriers to implementation of a 16-week semi-structured, near-peer, student guides program involving 39 first year medical students (MS1s) and 41 fourth year medical students (MS4s). Student enrollment was quantified, guide-guidee meetings tracked, and
>
 2 meetings defined as feasible. Meeting topics, impact on student advising, and barriers to sustainability were contextualized qualitatively.
Results
Twenty-two percent of all MS4s and 46% of MS1s enrolled in the program; 67% of guides facilitated the requisite two meetings with their group, which was less than our predetermined feasibility criteria of 75%. Most guide-guidee interactions occurred in person (91%), but text messages (82%) and video/mobile messaging apps (78%) were also used. Ninety-two percent of guidees recommended the program, and 85% were satisfied with guidance received. Barriers included meeting coordination, infrequent meetings, and informal meeting structure.
Conclusions
While the program was infeasible by predefined frequency criteria, participant satisfaction was high and academic, professional, and social benefits of near-peers were reported. In response, programmatic revisions now incorporate centralized support for meetings, e-mentorship, and guide training.