Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34762266›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2022

The application of the tracer method with peer observation and formative feedback for professional development in clinical practice: a scoping review.

Rudi A Steenbruggen, Marjo J M Maas, Thomas J Hoogeboom, Paul L P Brand, Philip J van der Wees

Open access · diamondAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Peer Observation in Medical Education: Identified Challenges and Potential Solutions.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rudi A SteenbruggenSchool of Health, Physiotherapy, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The Netherlands. r.a.steenbruggen@saxion.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9531-910X
Marjo J M MaasRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9851-3108
Thomas J HoogeboomRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2103-419X
Paul L P BrandIsala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1743-4193
Philip J van der WeesRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2881-5159
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLHAN University of Applied Sciences · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe tracer method, commonly used for quality assessment, can also be used as a tool for peer observation and formative feedback on professional development. This scoping review describes how, by whom, and with what effect the tracer method is applied as a formative professional development instrument between healthcare professionals of equal status and aims to identify the types of scientific evidence for this use of the tracer method.

methodsThe authors searched four electronic databases for eligible articles, which were screened and assessed for eligibility by two independent researchers. From eligible studies, data were extracted to summarize, collate, and make a narrative account of the findings.

resultsThe electronic search yielded 1757 unique studies, eight of which were included as valid and relevant to our aim: five qualitative, two mixed methods, and one quantitative study. Seven studies took place in hospitals and one in general practice. The tracer method was used mainly as a form of peer observation and formative feedback. Most studies evaluated the tracer method's feasibility and its impact on professional development. All but one study reported positive effects: participants described the tracer method generally as being valuable and worth continuing. DISCUSSION: Although the body of evidence is small and largely limited to the hospital setting, using the tracer method for peer observation and formative feedback between healthcare professionals of equal status appears sufficiently useful to merit further rigorous evaluation and implementation in continuous professional development in healthcare.

Indexed as

Formative FeedbackHealth PersonnelDelivery of Health CareHumansPeer GroupEvaluationLearning environmentLearning style

Identifiers

PMID34762266
PMCPMC8733089
OpenAlexW3212710972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.