Medical students’ perception of a unique humanistic mentoring program in a religious university: a convergent parallel mixed methods study

Table 3 Quantitative data of the percentages of participants’ ratings of twenty survey items under three focused themes

Themes	Items	Disagreed to Strongly Disagreed (%)	Neutral (%)	Agreed to Strongly Agreed (%)	Mean Score^b	Kirkpatrick levels^c
Theme 1: Guidance/support	1	13%	33%	54%	3.53 ± 1.01	1, 2
	2	21%	43%	36%	3.19 ± 1.04	1, 2
	3	9%	19%	72%	2.90 ± 1.02	1
	4	11%	38%	50%	2.81 ± 1.00	1
	5	15%	37%	48%	3.17 ± 1.13	1
	6^a	31%	45%	23%	3.50 ± 0.93	1, 2, 3
	7^a	37%	43%	20%	3.84 ± 0.98	1, 2
	8^a	28%	34%	38%	3.90 ± 1.02	1, 2
Theme 2: Mentor–mentee interaction/relationship	9	9%	22%	69%	3.47 ± 1.11	1
	10	20%	26%	54%	3.36 ± 1.27	1
	11	25%	24%	50%	3.60 ± 0.89	1
	12	10%	31%	58%	3.37 ± 1.11	1, 2, 3
	13	19%	35%	46%	3.43 ± 1.07	1
	14	14%	38%	47%	3.34 ± 0.84	1, 2
	15^a	32%	31%	36%	2.90 ± 1.07	1, 2
	16	9%	22%	68%	3.09 ± 1.16	1, 2
Theme 3: Cultivation of humanistic literacy	17	11%	51%	37%	3.95 ± 0.89	1, 2, 3
	18	33%	41%	27%	3.88 ± 1.01	1
	19	3%	24%	72%	3.43 ± 0.98	1, 2
	20	21%	38%	41%	3.20 ± 1.14	1, 2, 3

^aStatements in items were reverse-coded
^bThe respondents specified their level of agreement to each of the statements on a 5-point Likert–scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
^cKirkpatrick levels; Level 1 refers to the level of reaction or feelings by the respondents to the mentoring program. Level 2 refers to the changes in the respondents caused by participation in the mentoring program. Level 3 reveals whether or not the mentoring program has created a change in the respondents’ behavior

ISSN: 1472-6920