ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2015
Resident Perceptions of Giving and Receiving Peer-to-Peer Feedback.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the SPIKES Model for Improving Peer-to-Peer Feedback Among Internal Medicine Residents: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- Exploring the Multidimensional Advantages of Productive Failure in Cultivating Clinical Thinking, Collaboration, Stress Management, and Learning Retention in Resident Physicians.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Review
- The feedback dilemma in medical education: insights from medical residents' perspectives.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Reduction of discrepancies between students and instructors in the assessment of practical tasks through structured evaluation sheets and peer feedback.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Utilizing Community Procedure Clinics to Enhance Resident Procedural Education.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2024Article
- Feedback that Lands: Exploring How Residents Receive and Judge Feedback During Entrustable Professional Activities.Perspectives on medical education · 2023Article
- Making connections: exploring residents' perspectives on a virtual World Café as a novel approach for teaching Indigenous health issues.Canadian medical education journal · 2022Article
- Narrative Feedback to Family Medicine Faculty: A Content Analysis.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2022Article
- Does the format residents use to give and receive feedback about teaching affect the usefulness of the feedback?Canadian medical education journal · 2021Article
- Assessment of Emergency Medicine Resident Performance in a Pediatric In Situ Simulation Using Multi-Source Feedback.Cureus · 2021Article
- An Advanced Communication Skills Workshop Using Standardized Patients for Senior Medical Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2021Article
- Overcoming barriers to effective feedback: a solution-focused faculty development approach.International journal of medical education · 2020Article
- A Novel Resident-as-Teacher Curriculum to Improve Residents' Integration Into the Clinic.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2019Article
- Assessing residents' knowledge of patient satisfaction: a cross-sectional study at a large academic medical centre.BMJ open · 2017Article
- The effect of written standardized feedback on the structure and quality of surgical lectures: A prospective cohort study.BMC medical education · 2016Article
- Feedback: Cultivating a Positive Culture.Journal of graduate medical education · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeer feedback is increasingly being used by residency programs to provide an added dimension to the assessment process. Studies show that peer feedback is useful, uniquely informative, and reliable compared to other types of assessments. Potential barriers to implementation include insufficient training/preparation, negative consequences for working relationships, and a perceived lack of benefit.
objectiveWe explored the perceptions of residents involved in peer-to-peer feedback, focusing on factors that influence accuracy, usefulness, and application of the information.
methodsFamily medicine residents at the University of Michigan who were piloting an online peer assessment tool completed a brief survey to offer researchers insight into the peer feedback process. Focus groups were conducted to explore residents' perceptions that are most likely to affect giving and receiving peer feedback.
resultsSurvey responses were provided by 28 of 30 residents (93%). Responses showed that peer feedback provided useful (89%, 25 of 28) and unique (89%, 24 of 27) information, yet only 59% (16 of 27) reported that it benefited their training. Focus group participants included 21 of 29 eligible residents (72%). Approaches to improve residents' ability to give and accept feedback included preparatory training, clearly defined goals, standardization, fewer and more qualitatively oriented encounters, 1-on-1 delivery, immediacy of timing, and cultivation of a feedback culture.
conclusionsResidents perceived feedback as important and offered actionable suggestions to enhance accuracy, usefulness, and application of the information shared. The findings can be used to inform residency programs that are interested in creating a meaningful peer feedback process.
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.