Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28261391›Full record

SynthesisJournal of graduate medical education2017

Feedback and Assessment Tools for Handoffs: A Systematic Review.

Joshua Davis, Catherine Roach, Cater Elliott, Matthew Mardis, Ellen M Justice, Lee Ann Riesenberg

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of graduate medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. [Handoffs in the intensive care unit].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Joshua Davis
Catherine Roach
Cater Elliott
Matthew Mardis
Ellen M Justice
Lee Ann Riesenberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResident handoff communication skills are essential components of medical education training. There are no previous systematic reviews of feedback and evaluation tools for physician handoffs.

objectiveWe performed a systematic review of articles focused on inpatient handoff feedback or assessment tools.

methodsThe authors conducted a systematic review of English-language literature published from January 1, 2008, to May 13, 2015 on handoff feedback or assessment tools used in undergraduate or graduate medical education. All articles were reviewed by 2 independent abstractors. Included articles were assessed using a quality scoring system.

resultsA total of 26 articles with 32 tools met inclusion criteria, including 3 focused on feedback, 8 on assessment, and 15 on both feedback and assessment. All tools were used in an inpatient setting. Feedback and/or assessment improved the content or organization measures of handoff, while process and professionalism measures were less reliably improved. The Handoff Clinical Evaluation Exercise or a similar tool was used most frequently. Of included studies, 23% (6 of 26) were validity evidence studies, and 31% (8 of 26) of articles included a tool with behavioral anchors. A total of 35% (9 of 26) of studies used simulation or standardized patient encounters.

conclusionsA number of feedback and assessment tools for physician handoffs in several specialties have been studied. Limited research has been done on the studied tools. These tools may assist medical educators in assessing trainees' handoff skills.

Indexed as

CommunicationEducation, MedicalFeedbackHumansInternship and ResidencyPatient Handoff

Identifiers

PMID28261391
PMCPMC5319625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.