# Navigating Undergraduate Medical Education: The Impact of Enhanced Mentorship Pairing at a New Medical School

## TL;DR

A mentorship program at a new medical school helped first-year students transition better, though matching criteria had limited impact on outcomes.

## Contribution

This study evaluates the effectiveness of a peer-mentorship program with enhanced matching criteria at a new medical school.

## Key findings

- Enhanced matching criteria increased communication frequency but not academic performance or transition success.
- In-person communication was preferred in 1:1 pairings, though differences in outcomes were not significant.
- Mentorship programs are valuable for student engagement and perceived improvement in transition and performance.

## Abstract

Introduction

Transitioning into medical school is challenging, particularly in the first year, with a notable support gap. This study aimed to evaluate a mentorship program at a new medical school.

Methods

Initiated in 2017 at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley School of Medicine, the mentorship program had two iterations: initial random pairings and subsequent formative pairings based on matching criteria. A mixed-methods approach assessed its effectiveness in supporting first-year students.

Results

Of 109 first-year students, 76% completed a 6-month survey. Both classes primarily had male mentees with varied interests in primary or specialty care. No significant demographic differences or benefits between 1:1 and 2:1 mentor-mentee pairings were found, though in-person communication was preferred in 1:1 pairings (p=0.036). While enhanced matching criteria improved perceived transitions (p=0.47) and academic performance (p=0.84), these did not reach statistical significance. However, it increased the frequency of communication (p=0.038).

Conclusion

The implementation of a peer-mentorship program at a new medical school demonstrates high engagement among first- and second-year medical students with perceived improvement in transition and academic performance. Although enhanced matching criteria led to more frequent communication, highlighting the significance of careful mentor-mentee pairings, they did not correlate with better transitions or academic outcomes. This indicates that while these criteria are valuable, they are less crucial than simply having a mentorship program in place.