Feedback on Oral Presentations During Pediatric Clerkships: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Sox, Colin M.; Dell, Michael; Phillipi, Carrie A.; Cabral, Howard; Vargas, Gabriela; Lewin, Linda

doi:10.1542/peds.2014-1209

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There were 1974 participants, including 660/1463 (45%) men from 13 studies that reported gender data 33 38 42–52. Included studies involved students (medical, mixed health professions and pharmacy) (1869, 95%) in 16 studies,33 37 38 42–45 47–55 and doctors (105, 5%) in four studies 31 39 46 56. All studies included assessment of a discrete task except two studies that involved longitudinal evaluations 39 46.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies included assessment of a discrete task except two studies that involved longitudinal evaluations 39 46. Three studies evaluated performance in a clinical practice setting (involving teaching skills,39 professional and communication skills46 and oral case presentations),55 and the remaining 17 assessed performance in a simulated environment (surgical procedures, nasogastric tube insertion, intubation, hearing test, pharmacy consultation or CPR)31 33 37 38 42–45 47–54 56 (see ‘Included studies’ section in the supplementary material for more details, online supplementary appendix 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveVerbal face-to-face feedback on clinical task performance is a fundamental component of health professions education. Experts argue that feedback is critical for performance improvement, but the evidence is limited. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of face-to-face verbal feedback from a health professional, compared with alternative or no feedback, on the objective workplace task performance of another health professional.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched the full holdings of Ovid MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to 1 February 2019 and searched references of included studies. Two authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials investigating the effect of feedback, in which health professionals were randomised to individual verbal face-to-face feedback compared with no feedback or alternative feedback and available as full-text publications in English. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. For feedback compared with no feedback, outcome data from included studies were pooled using a random effects model.ResultsIn total, 26 trials met the inclusion criteria, involving 2307 participants. For the effect of verbal face-to-face feedback on performance compared with no feedback, when studies at high risk of bias were excluded, eight studies involving 392 health professionals were included in a meta-analysis: the standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.7 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.03; p<0.001) in favour of feedback. The calculated SMD prediction interval was −0.06 to 1.46. For feedback compared with alternative feedback, studies could not be pooled due to substantial design and intervention heterogeneity. All included studies were summarised, and key factors likely to influence performance were identified including components within feedback interventions, instruction and practice opportunities.ConclusionsVerbal face-to-face feedback in the health professions may result in a moderate to large improvement in workplace task performance, compared with no feedback. However, the quality of evidence was low, primarily due to risk of bias and publication bias. Further research is needed. In particular, we found a lack of high-quality trials that clearly reported key components likely to influence performance.Trial registration numberCRD42017081796.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a consequence, trainees may begin to devalue external feedback in general, relying instead on self-assessment [ 10 , 11 ]. It is encouraging that this need not be the case, and the quality of feedback improves after specific training of clinical faculty [ 29 , 54 , 55 ].…”

Section: Background Evidence To Guidelines For the Individual Clinicamentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines: the do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe guidelines offered in this paper aim to amalgamate the literature on formative feedback into practical Do’s, Don’ts and Don’t Knows for individual clinical supervisors and for the institutions that support clinical learning.MethodsThe authors built consensus by an iterative process. Do’s and Don’ts were proposed based on authors’ individual teaching experience and awareness of the literature, and the amalgamated set of guidelines were then refined by all authors and the evidence was summarized for each guideline. Don’t Knows were identified as being important questions to this international group of educators which if answered would change practice. The criteria for inclusion of evidence for these guidelines were not those of a systematic review, so indicators of strength of these recommendations were developed which combine the evidence with the authors’ consensus.ResultsA set of 32 Do and Don’t guidelines with the important Don’t Knows was compiled along with a summary of the evidence for each. These are divided into guidelines for the individual clinical supervisor giving feedback to their trainee (recommendations about both the process and the content of feedback) and guidelines for the learning culture (what elements of learning culture support the exchange of meaningful feedback, and what elements constrain it?)ConclusionFeedback is not easy to get right, but it is essential to learning in medicine, and there is a wealth of evidence supporting the Do’s and warning against the Don’ts. Further research into the critical Don’t Knows of feedback is required. A new definition is offered: Helpful feedback is a supportive conversation that clarifies the trainee’s awareness of their developing competencies, enhances their self-efficacy for making progress, challenges them to set objectives for improvement, and facilitates their development of strategies to enable that improvement to occur.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi: 10.1007/s40037-015-0231-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…O ral case presentation (OCP) is recognized as a central educational and patient care activity in a variety of clinical settings. Interestingly, most of the scholarly focus on OCP has occurred in internal medicine [1][2][3][4][5] and pediatrics; 6,7 in other areas, OCP is paid little attention. The emergency medicine OCP (EM-OCP) represents a particularly salient example of this problem due to the chaotic and fast-paced clinical environment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,4 Two pediatric randomized controlled trial (RCTs) have evaluated the effect of detailed feedback and of an online module on students' OCP delivery. 6,7 Although many aspects of the OCP are transferable among specialties, the nature of EM demands a modified version. The EM-OCP dictates whether emergent or urgent action is needed, assesses for life-threatening conditions, and determines the allotment of finite resources in a busy department.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency Medicine Oral Case Presentations: Evaluation of a Novel Curriculum

Wawrykow

McColl

Velji

et al. 2019

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Oral case presentation (OCP) is recognized as a central educational and patient care activity, yet has not been well studied in the emergency medicine (EM) setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a novel curriculum on medical students' EM-OCP skills. Methods: An EM-OCP assessment tool and novel blended curriculum were developed based on results from a Canadian survey of emergency physicians and focus groups with key stakeholders. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of 96 clerkship students between 2017 and 2018. Students were randomly assigned into an intervention group where they completed a novel EM-OCP curriculum or a control group without the curriculum. A pretest baseline assessment of students' OCP skills was performed using a standardized patient case at the beginning of their EM rotation. Similarly, all students completed a posttest assessment with a different standardized patient case at the end of their 6-week EM rotation. Audio recordings of pre-and posttests were assessed using the EM-OCP assessment tool by two blinded assessors. Results: Using the Kruskal-Wallis test, all students demonstrated improvement in EM-OCP skills between their pretest and posttest; however, those who received the curriculum (intervention group) showed significantly greater improvement in "synthesis of information," "management," and "overall entrustment decision" scores. Conclusions: Implementation of a novel EM-OCP curriculum resulted in improved clinical reasoning and higher entrustment scores. This curriculum could improve OCP performance not only in EM settings but also across specialties where medical students and residents manage critically ill patients.

show abstract

Feedback on Oral Presentations During Pediatric Clerkships: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Cited by 14 publications

References 13 publications

Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Guidelines: the do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education

Emergency Medicine Oral Case Presentations: Evaluation of a Novel Curriculum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About