Near-peer mentorship for newly qualified doctors; what are the benefits, and what methods can be used to overcome the pitfalls?

INTRODUCTION: Access to mentorship is frequently cited as a priority for doctors, however formal mentorship programmes throughout training are lacking for residents. Near-peer mentorship is a faculty-light option to potentially bridge this mentorship gap, however the literature in the clinical postgraduate setting is not comprehensive. We aim to evaluate the benefits and pitfalls of near-peer mentorship in a postgraduate setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: of near-peer mentorship were applied. After allocation to the frameworks' overarching themes, data was analysed thematically. RESULTS: Across 10 identified studies (one quantitative, three qualitative, six mixed-methods), near-peer mentorship was perceived to be beneficial (72-100% approval), with 85-99% of mentors and mentees desiring continuation of schemes at their units (seven UK-based, two Australian, one Canadian). The main themes identified were Mentee benefits, including careers advice and development of transferable skills; Mentor benefits, including leadership and organisational skill improvements; Organisational benefits, including reduced faculty workload and an enhanced sense of community. Pitfalls included a perceived lack of mentor expertise, shortage of time and resources, and unsupportive mentoring relationships. DISCUSSION: This research suggests that near-peer mentorship offers benefits for the mentee, mentor and organisation, if care is taken to mitigate the potential pitfalls. The main benefits versus traditional senior faculty mentorship derive from the concept of social and cognitive congruence, whereby a more closely relatable tutor is better able to tailor learning in terms understood by the tutee. Practical recommendations to optimise near-pear mentorship include mentorship pyramids, matching of pairings within the same clinical sites, and a hybrid matching approach with the option for mentee-led selection.