Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30051003›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2017

Do Emergency Medicine Residents Prefer Resident-initiated or Attending-initiated Feedback?

Jonathan McGhee, Colleen Crowe, Aaron Kraut, Ava Pierce, Avital Porat, Benjamin Schnapp, Amber Laurie, Rongwei Fu, Lalena Yarris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AEM education and training, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Jonathan McGheeChristiana Care Health System Newark DE.
Colleen CroweMedical College of Wisconsin Milwaukee WI.
Aaron KrautNorthwestern University Chicago IL.
Ava PierceUniversity of Texas Southwestern Dallas TX.
Avital PoratIchan School of Medicine at Mount Sanai New York NY.
Benjamin SchnappIchan School of Medicine at Mount Sanai New York NY.
Amber LaurieOregon Health & Science University Portland OR.
Rongwei FuOregon Health & Science University Portland OR.
Lalena YarrisOregon Health & Science University Portland OR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReal-time feedback is crucial to improving physician performance. Emerging theory suggests that learner-initiated feedback may be more effective in changing performance than attending-initiated feedback, but little is known about how residents perceive resident- versus attending-initiated feedback.

objectivesThe primary aim was to determine whether residents' satisfaction varied by learner-versus attending-initiated feedback encounters. We hypothesized that residents would be more satisfied with resident-initiated feedback.

methodsThis was a multicenter study of five emergency medicine residency programs. We developed a milestones-based, real-time feedback intervention that provided behavioral anchors for ED subcompetencies and prompted a feedback discussion. The intervention was implemented at all sites for a 3-month period from March to November 2014. Residents were asked to initiate one card per shift; attendings were also invited to initiate encounters and, in either instance, asked to provide one specific suggestion for improvement. Residents confidentially rated their satisfaction with feedback on a 10-point scale. Reported satisfaction was categorized as "very satisfied" (score of 10) versus "less than very satisfied" (score < 10). Logistic regression was used to assess the difference in satisfaction between resident- versus attending-initiated feedback, and random effects were used to account for the clustering of repeated ratings within resident and by site.

resultsA total of 785 cards was collected from five sites. Participation varied by site (range = 21-487 cards per site). Of the 587 cards with both feedback initiator and satisfaction data, 67% (396/587) were resident-initiated, and median satisfaction score was 10 (range = 4-10). There was no difference in the odds of being "very satisfied" by resident- vesus attending-initiated encounters (odds ratio = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = 0.41 to 2.83).

conclusionsOur results suggest that residents are likely to be as satisfied with self-initiated feedback as attending-initiated feedback. Further research is needed to determine whether resident-initiated feedback is more likely to be incorporated into practice and result in objective performance improvements.

Identifiers

PMID30051003
PMCPMC6001489

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.