ArticleAEM education and training2017
Feedback in Medical Education: A Critical Appraisal.
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 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Formative feedback to improve pharmacology learning: Proposed principles and guidelines for effective practice.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Guideline
- Integrating formative and summative feedback in online situational judgement tests: effects of feedback design on medical students' motivational and cognitive learning factors.Medical education online · 2026Trial
- Feedback in an Entrustment-Based Objective Structured Clinical Examination: Analysis of Content and Scoring Methods.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Trial
- Impact of performance and information feedback on medical interns' confidence-accuracy calibration.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2024Trial
- Evaluating the SPIKES Model for Improving Peer-to-Peer Feedback Among Internal Medicine Residents: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- A randomised controlled trial of feedback to improve patient satisfaction and consultation skills in medical students.BMC medical education · 2020Trial
- From Talk to Text: Improving Feedback Concordance With a Simple Intervention.AEM education and training · 2026Article
- Feedback as a two-way process: how relational dynamics shape learning in workplace-based training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Leaning into Necessary Discomforts: Striving for Clinical Excellence While Maintaining Wellness.ATS scholar · 2025Review
- Article
- Understanding Perceptions of the Postsimulation Debriefing Learning Environment in Paediatric Trainees.The clinical teacher · 2025Article
- Feedback Framework in Psychiatry Residency Training: A Cross-sectional Survey Amongst Psychiatry Post-graduate Residents of India.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Optimizing feedback reception: a scoping review of skills and strategies for medical learners.Canadian medical education journal · 2025Article
- Exploring effective video-review strategies of patient encounters for medical students: precepted review versus peer discussion.Medical education online · 2024Article
- Providing Delayed, In-Person Collected Feedback From Residents to Teaching Faculty: Lessons Learned.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Article
- Reliability of ChatGPT in automated essay scoring for dental undergraduate examinations.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- How Do Trainees Use EPAs to Regulate Their Learning in the Clinical Environment? A Grounded Theory Study.Perspectives on medical education · 2024Article
- Documenting Performance and Feedback in Medical Education: An Essential Skill.Medical science educator · 2023Article
- "It kinda helped us to be there": students' perspectives on the use of virtual patient software in psychiatry posting.BMC medical education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective was to review and critically appraise the medical education literature pertaining to feedback and highlight influential papers that inform our current understanding of the role of feedback in medical education.
methodsA search of the English language literature in querying Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsychINFO, PubMed, and Scopus identified 327 feedback-related papers using either quantitative (hypothesis-testing or observational investigations of educational interventions), qualitative methods (exploring important phenomena in emergency medicine [EM] education), or review methods.Two reviewers independently screened each category of publications using previously established exclusion criteria. Six reviewers then independently scored the remaining 54 publications using a qualitative, quantitative, or review paper scoring system. Each scoring system consisted of nine criteria and used parallel scoring metrics that have been previously used in critical appraisals of education research.
resultsFifty-four feedback papers (25 quantitative studies, 24 qualitative studies, five review papers) met the a priori criteria for inclusion and were reviewed. Eight quantitative studies, nine qualitative studies, and three review papers were ranked highly by the reviewers and are summarized in this article.
conclusionsThis inaugural Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academy critical appraisal highlights 20 feedback in medical education papers that describe the current state of the feedback literature. A summary of current factors that influence feedback effectiveness is discussed, along with practical implications for EM educators and the next steps for research.
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.