Mentor and mentee experiences of the NMC-CBME mentorship programme in India: a two-centre qualitative study

Background India’s National Medical Commission mandated a formal mentorship programme within competency-based medical education for all MBBS students. However, evidence regarding how mentors and mentees experience this programme remains limited. This study explored the perceptions and experiences of both groups across two geographically and demographically distinct tertiary-care institutions. Methods A two-centre parallel qualitative study was conducted at Site A (Jharkhand) and Site B (Arunachal Pradesh). Mentee perspectives were collected through eight focus group discussions (four/site) with MBBS students. Mentor perspectives were explored through in-depth interviews (15 at Site A & 24 at Site B). Focus Group Discussion (FGD) data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke), while In Depth Interviews (IDI) data were analysed using framework analysis. Site-level analyses were conducted independently and integrated through cross-site thematic comparison. Reporting followed COREQ guidelines. Results 39 mentors and 56 mentees participated. Nine thematic domains emerged. Eight were convergent across both sites: structural and implementation inadequacies; scheduling deficiencies and boundary violations; differential academic support quality; psychosocial support potential constrained by structural barriers; mentor unpreparedness and quality variability; hierarchical communication barriers; phase-specific mentorship needs; and an accountability vacuum with absent feedback mechanisms. One theme (cultural and contextual specificity) was unique to Site B. Across all data sources, participants endorsed mentorship in principle but described implementation as structurally inadequate. Informal communication channels and social interactions, organically adopted at Site B, appeared to mitigate some gaps that participants at Site A identified as desired improvements. Conclusions This study concludes that the convergence of findings across two sites suggests that these implementation challenges may reflect broader features of the programme; however, this interpretation should be considered an analytical inference requiring confirmation in broader settings. Strengthening mentorship requires protected time, structured mentor training, explicit confidentiality safeguards, separation of mentoring from summative evaluation, and institutional recognition. Findings further indicate that context-sensitive adaptation is essential, particularly for minority and tribal student populations.