SynthesisBMC medical education2014
Factors influencing the effectiveness of multisource feedback in improving the professional practice of medical doctors: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of patient feedback on the medical performance of qualified doctors: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2018Pooled it
- A randomised controlled trial of feedback to improve patient satisfaction and consultation skills in medical students.BMC medical education · 2020Trial
- Article
- PROTOCOL: Multisource Feedback and Work Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- The engagement equation: a model for understanding what drives voluntary physician engagement with data-driven clinical performance feedback.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Narrative comments in internal medicine clerkship evaluations: room to grow.Medical education online · 2025Article
- Exploring effective patient feedback methods for eHealth in general practice.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Multisource feedback in residency training: A quantitative study to investigate the feedback conversation.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
- Self and peer feedback engagement and receptivity among medical students with varied academic performance in the clinical skills laboratory.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Catalytic effect of multisource feedback for trauma team captains: a mixed-methods prospective study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Feedback in Medical Education: An Evidence-based Guide to Best Practices from the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2023Review
- The Impact of Multisource Feedback on Continuing Medical Education, Clinical Performance and Patient Experience: Innovation in a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service.Journal of CME · 2023Article
- Reducing ' probably benign ' assessments in normal mammograms: The role of radiologist experience.European journal of radiology open · 2023Article
- Patients as Feedback Providers: Exploring Medical Students' Credibility Judgments.Perspectives on medical education · 2023Article
- How does multisource feedback influence residency training? A qualitative case study.Medical education · 2022Article
- A Training Intervention through a 360° Multisource Feedback Model.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Correlation of attending and patient assessment of resident communication skills in the emergency department.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Feasibility, quality and validity of narrative multisource feedback in postgraduate training: a mixed-method study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Doctors' maintenance of professional competence: a qualitative study informed by the theory of planned behaviour.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Feedback Credibility in Healthcare Education: a Systematic Review and Synthesis.Medical science educator · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultisource feedback (MSF) is currently being introduced in the UK as part of a cycle of performance review for doctors. However, although it is suggested that the provision of feedback can lead to a positive change in performance and learning for medical professionals, the evidence supporting these assumptions is unclear. The aim of this review, therefore, was to identify the key factors that influence the effectiveness of multisource feedback in improving the professional practice of medical doctors.
methodRelevant electronic bibliographic databases were searched for studies that aimed to assess the impact of MSF on professional practice. Two reviewers independently selected and quality assessed the studies and abstracted data regarding study design, setting, MSF instrument, behaviour changes identified and influencing factors using a standard data extraction form.
resultsA total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and quality assessment criteria. While seven studies reported only a general change in professional practice, a further seven studies identified specific changes in behaviour. The main professional behaviours that were found to be influenced by the feedback were communication, both with colleagues and patients and an improvement in clinical competence/skills. The main factors found to influence the acceptance and use of MSF were the format of the feedback, specifically in terms of whether it was facilitated, or if narrative comments were included in the review, and if the feedback was from sources that the physician believed to be knowledgeable and credible.
conclusionsWhile there is limited evidence suggesting that MSF can influence professional performance, the quality of this evidence is variable. Further research is necessary to establish how this type of feedback actually influences behaviours and what factors have greatest influence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.