Background and Objectives: Collection of feedback regarding medical student clinical experiences for formative or summative purposes remains a challenge across clinical settings. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the use of a quick response (QR) code-linked online feedback form improves the frequency and efficiency of rater feedback.
Methods: In 2016, we compared paper-based feedback forms, an online feedback form, and a QR code-linked online feedback form at 15 family medicine clerkship sites across the United States. Outcome measures included usability, number of feedback submissions per student, number of unique raters providing feedback, and timeliness of feedback provided to the clerkship director.
Results: The feedback method was significantly associated with usability, with QR code scoring the highest, and paper second. Accessing feedback via QR code was associated with the shortest time to prepare feedback. Across four rotations, separate repeated measures analyses of variance showed no effect of feedback system on the number of submissions per student or the number of unique raters.
Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate that preceptors in the family medicine clerkship rate QR code-linked feedback as a high usability platform. Additionally, this platform resulted in faster form completion than paper or online forms. An overarching finding of this study is that feedback forms must be portable and easily accessible. Potential implementation barriers and the social norm for providing feedback in this manner need to be considered.
Pregnant women are increasingly using mobile apps as a source of supplemental information. These pregnancy-related mobile apps present women with contradictory risk recommendations without the medical research to support their claims. The content analysis describes a sample of the pregnancy-tracking mobile application environment open to pregnant mothers and uses the social amplification of risk framework. Within this framework, written recommendations and the presence or absence of corresponding citations on controversial topics in pregnancy were recorded and risk was coded as received contradictory information. Of the 48 pregnancy-tracking mobile apps downloaded, 11 (22.9%) were associated with either a seller or a developer with a medical background. Only 24 of 48 (50.0%) of the apps cited a source, such as a health professional agency or peer-reviewed research journal for health recommendations. In our results, we show a sampling of contradictory risk recommendations made by mobile apps that cite or do not cite their source for that recommendation on 8 controversial topics in pregnancy. Findings suggest providers treating pregnant women must be aware of the complex information environment and help them navigate the risk information they encounter on some of the most popular pregnancy-tracking mobile apps.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.