ArticleAEM education and training2021
A qualitative assessment of emergency medicine residents' receptivity to feedback.
Article in AEM education and training, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond receiving: feedback literacy as a catalyst for resident growth, a scoping review.Medical education online · 2026Article
- Quantifying Emergency Medicine Residency Learning Curves Using Natural Language Processing: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Helping Learners Receive Feedback in the Emergency Department.AEM education and training · 2025Article
- Dental Teacher Feedback and Student Learning: A Qualitative Study.Dentistry journal · 2023Article
- Resident Physician Interactions and Engagement With Written Assessments of Performance.Family medicine · 2023Article
- A qualitative assessment of emergency medicine residents' receptivity to feedback.AEM education and training · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective feedback is the cornerstone of competency-based education. The emergency department (ED) is a unique learning and feedback environment. Developing our understanding of emergency medicine (EM) residents' experiences around feedback will improve resident training and inform EM faculty development programs.
objectiveThis qualitative study explores the feedback culture and practices in EM and resident's experiences and attitudes toward feedback in this specific training environment.
methodsAt a large categorical EM program, 15 residents voluntarily participated in semistructured interviews regarding feedback. These individual interviews were performed by a nonphysician investigator and transcripts underwent an inductive multistep coding process. Transcripts were analyzed to identify common factors influencing feedback and then comparisons were made between residents to explore the interconnectedness of identified factors and further categorize consistent themes.
resultsFactors inherent to the ED environment make the delivery of effective feedback challenging. Residents also revealed that feedback-seeking/-avoidant behavior and receptivity to feedback are multifactorial. Residents actively seek feedback when they feel that they performed well but tend to avoid feedback interactions when they expect constructive feedback. Finally, residents filter feedback based on attending personality and perceived practice style as well as their own desired practice style.
conclusionsIt is important for program leaders to understand their residents' experiences with feedback and engage both faculty and residents in conversations around feedback delivery and receptivity. An improved understanding of these experiences might also reveal barriers to performance assessment and guide efforts to improve the accuracy and reliability of resident evaluations.
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.