Abstract:Receiving feedback on daily clinical activities, in whatever form, is crucial for the development of clinical proficiency. Multisource or 360-degree feedback procedures have been recommended to include various co-workers as sources of feedback. In 2008, a web-based multisource feedback (MSF) tool for medical residents was developed at the University Medical Center Utrecht and launched nationally in the Netherlands and has been widely used since then. In 2012, an evaluation was carried out to collect opinions o… Show more
“…For example, one study on MSF reported that 89% of trainees agreed the comments were useful, whereas 38% agreed the numeric report was useful . Trainees particularly valued the verbal delivery of performance information .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Trainees highlighted additional aspects of the assessment messages they valued, such as their breadth, including coverage of non‐technical skills or their provision of a more holistic picture of performance:What I think is more useful is when you get feedback about how you're performing as a trainee in general……”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Training level influenced views of feedback by tool. For example, in one study, 52% of senior trainees felt CBDs were more useful at junior levels, whereas respondents in another study reported that MSF was useful in all years of training . Some senior trainees highlighted their desire for different types of feedback:I am wanting to be assessed more globally.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 For example, one study on MSF reported that 89% of trainees agreed the comments were useful, whereas 38% agreed the numeric report was useful. 33 Trainees particularly valued the verbal delivery of performance information. 34 In a study conducted by Sabey and Harris, 94% of trainees described their verbal feedback as useful compared with 74% for written comments.…”
Section: Trainees Value Developmental Assessment Messagesmentioning
Objectives
This study was designed as a narrative systematic literature review of medical specialist trainees’ perspectives of the assessment messages they receive in the context of clinical performance assessments. The aim of the study was to determine if trainees value the information they receive through the formats designed to promote their development and, if not, the reasons for this.
Methods
The authors searched the ERIC, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for articles published up to 16 June 2018 that present original data on trainees’ perspectives of the assessment messages they receive in the context of work‐based assessments (WBAs) and in‐training assessments (ITAs) used within their training programmes. All authors screened 938 abstracts and 139 full‐text articles were assessed after this. Descriptions of quantitative data and thematic analysis of qualitative data were used to present the opinions of trainees.
Results
Thirty‐three articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty‐six articles (79%) described trainees’ perspectives in the context of WBA and the remaining articles referred to ITA formats. Wide‐ranging opinions were reported. The analysis categorised these into three themes: trainees value developmental assessment messages; trainees become disengaged when assessment messages are not developmental, and trainees’ views depend on the environment, the assessor and themselves. Some trainees reported that the assessment messages were valuable and provided input on their performance to guide their development, but many disagreed. In particular, the trainee's own level of engagement with the assessments influenced his or her perspectives on the messages received.
Conclusions
Trainees do not universally perceive that clinical performance assessments provide them with the valuable developmental input on their performance they were designed to do. Factors related to the environment, the assessor and themselves influence their perspectives.
“…For example, one study on MSF reported that 89% of trainees agreed the comments were useful, whereas 38% agreed the numeric report was useful . Trainees particularly valued the verbal delivery of performance information .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Trainees highlighted additional aspects of the assessment messages they valued, such as their breadth, including coverage of non‐technical skills or their provision of a more holistic picture of performance:What I think is more useful is when you get feedback about how you're performing as a trainee in general……”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Training level influenced views of feedback by tool. For example, in one study, 52% of senior trainees felt CBDs were more useful at junior levels, whereas respondents in another study reported that MSF was useful in all years of training . Some senior trainees highlighted their desire for different types of feedback:I am wanting to be assessed more globally.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 For example, one study on MSF reported that 89% of trainees agreed the comments were useful, whereas 38% agreed the numeric report was useful. 33 Trainees particularly valued the verbal delivery of performance information. 34 In a study conducted by Sabey and Harris, 94% of trainees described their verbal feedback as useful compared with 74% for written comments.…”
Section: Trainees Value Developmental Assessment Messagesmentioning
Objectives
This study was designed as a narrative systematic literature review of medical specialist trainees’ perspectives of the assessment messages they receive in the context of clinical performance assessments. The aim of the study was to determine if trainees value the information they receive through the formats designed to promote their development and, if not, the reasons for this.
Methods
The authors searched the ERIC, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for articles published up to 16 June 2018 that present original data on trainees’ perspectives of the assessment messages they receive in the context of work‐based assessments (WBAs) and in‐training assessments (ITAs) used within their training programmes. All authors screened 938 abstracts and 139 full‐text articles were assessed after this. Descriptions of quantitative data and thematic analysis of qualitative data were used to present the opinions of trainees.
Results
Thirty‐three articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty‐six articles (79%) described trainees’ perspectives in the context of WBA and the remaining articles referred to ITA formats. Wide‐ranging opinions were reported. The analysis categorised these into three themes: trainees value developmental assessment messages; trainees become disengaged when assessment messages are not developmental, and trainees’ views depend on the environment, the assessor and themselves. Some trainees reported that the assessment messages were valuable and provided input on their performance to guide their development, but many disagreed. In particular, the trainee's own level of engagement with the assessments influenced his or her perspectives on the messages received.
Conclusions
Trainees do not universally perceive that clinical performance assessments provide them with the valuable developmental input on their performance they were designed to do. Factors related to the environment, the assessor and themselves influence their perspectives.
“…Multisource feedback, also known as 360 degree or multirater feedback, has been used in the medical setting to provide an assessment of an individual by two or more individuals of different disciplines [2–7]. However, due to the small size and intimate nature of multidisciplinary oncologic teams, acquiring and delivering honest and constructive interprofessional feedback may be particularly challenging [8]. No studies have investigated optimal methods of doing so besides nondescript evaluations of conferences, presentations, or tumor boards, and no validated oncology-specific instrument exists [9,10].…”
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.
