↓ Skip to main content

A new approach to mentoring for research careers: the National Research Mentoring Network

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Proceedings, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#21 of 367)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

17 tweeters
1 Wikipedia page


85 Dimensions

Readers on

135 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
A new approach to mentoring for research careers: the National Research Mentoring Network
Published in
BMC Proceedings, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12919-017-0083-8
Pubmed ID

Christine A. Sorkness, Christine Pfund, Elizabeth O. Ofili, Kolawole S. Okuyemi, Jamboor K. Vishwanatha, Maria Elena Zavala, Theresa Pesavento, Mary Fernandez, Anthony Tissera, Alp Deveci, Damaris Javier, Alexis Short, Paige Cooper, Harlan Jones, Spero Manson, Dedra Buchwald, Kristin Eide, Andrea Gouldy, Erin Kelly, Nicole Langford, Richard McGee, Clifford Steer, Thad Unold, Anne Marie Weber-Main, Adriana Báez, Jonathan Stiles, Priscilla Pemu, Winston Thompson, Judith Gwathmey, Kimberly Lawson, Japera Johnson, Meldra Hall, Douglas Paulsen, Mona Fouad, Ann Smith, Rafael Luna, Donald Wilson, Greg Adelsberger, Drew Simenson, Abby Cook, Monica Feliu‐Mojer, Eileen Harwood, Amy Jones, Janet Branchaw, Stephen Thomas, Amanda Butz, Angela Byars‐Winston, Stephanie House, Melissa McDaniels, Sandra Quinn, Jenna Rogers, Kim Spencer, Emily Utzerath, DUPLICATE of Weber-Main, Veronica Womack


Effective mentorship is critical to the success of early stage investigators, and has been linked to enhanced mentee productivity, self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. The mission of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) is to provide all trainees across the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences with evidence-based mentorship and professional development programming that emphasizes the benefits and challenges of diversity, inclusivity, and culture within mentoring relationships, and more broadly the research workforce. The purpose of this paper is to describe the structure and activities of NRMN. NRMN serves as a national training hub for mentors and mentees striving to improve their relationships by better aligning expectations, promoting professional development, maintaining effective communication, addressing equity and inclusion, assessing understanding, fostering independence, and cultivating ethical behavior. Training is offered in-person at institutions, regional training, or national meetings, as well as via synchronous and asynchronous platforms; the growing training demand is being met by a cadre of NRMN Master Facilitators. NRMN offers career stage-focused coaching models for grant writing, and other professional development programs. NRMN partners with diverse stakeholders from the NIH-sponsored Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), as well as organizations outside the DPC to work synergistically towards common diversity goals. NRMN offers a virtual portal to the Network and all NRMN program offerings for mentees and mentors across career development stages. NRMNet provides access to a wide array of mentoring experiences and resources including MyNRMN, Guided Virtual Mentorship Program, news, training calendar, videos, and workshops. National scale and sustainability are being addressed by NRMN "Coaches-in-Training" offerings for more senior researchers to implement coaching models across the nation. "Shark Tanks" provide intensive review and coaching for early career health disparities investigators, focusing on grant writing for graduate students, postdoctoral trainees, and junior faculty. Partners from diverse perspectives are building the national capacity and sparking the institutional changes necessary to truly diversify and transform the biomedical research workforce. NRMN works to leverage resources towards the goals of sustainability, scalability, and expanded reach.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 14 10%
Other 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 35 26%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 19 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 9%
Psychology 10 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 47 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2019.
All research outputs
of 21,742,867 outputs
Outputs from BMC Proceedings
of 367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 446,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Proceedings
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,742,867 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 367 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.