ReviewCureus2022
Feedback in an Epidemic?
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Student and Lecturer Perceptions of the Use of an AI to Improve Communication Skills in Healthcare: An Interview Study.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
- Feedback and Debriefing in Healthcare Education to Improve Communication Skills: A Large Scoping Review.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Undergraduates and postgraduates frequently receive feedback on their clinical and non-clinical performance and progression throughout their studies and career. Good quality feedback has been shown to improve trainees' confidence and performance. This article discusses the benefits of feedback and reviews the communication, technical, financial, and networking barriers to feedback introduced by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its impact on the quality of medical and dental education in the UK, followed by a critical reflection. In addition, it reviews the pros and cons of self-assessment of clinical learning, and it provides an overview of the most widely accepted feedback models: Pendleton's rules, SET-GO method, agenda-led, outcome-based analysis (ALOBA) model and Prepare to Ask-Discuss-Ask-Plan Together (Prepare to ADAPT) on the quality of feedback received. The aim is to identify the most suitable feedback method to help trainees with their clinical and professional development during the COVID-19 pandemic and any possible pandemics in the future.
Indexed as
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.