Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36276778›Full record

ArticleMedical science educator2022

The Practice of Feedback in Health Professions Education in the Hierarchical and Collectivistic Culture: a Scoping Review.

Diantha Soemantri, Hikmawati Nurokhmanti, Nurul Qomariyah, Mora Claramita

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Palliative and supportive care in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a qualitative study on attitudes and perceptions of health professionals.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Diantha SoemantriDepartment of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-3956-1265
Hikmawati NurokhmantiDepartment of Medical, Health Professions Education, and Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine-Public Health-and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Nurul QomariyahDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Mora ClaramitaDepartment of Medical, Health Professions Education, and Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine-Public Health-and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global trend in student assessment is moving towards outcome-based assessment that requires multiple systematic data points and continuous feedback. However, in hierarchical and collectivistic cultures, one-way communication is practised more often, leading to less dialogical feedback. This scoping review explored feedback practice in Asian educational setting. Based on the 17 articles selected, the findings were categorised into four themes, i.e. inhibiting or facilitating factors of feedback, influences of cultural factors on feedback, discrepancies between students' and teachers' perceptions of feedback and impact of feedback. Hierarchical and collectivist cultural aspects, such as preference for group feedback, are pertinent to feedback practice, which likely influence the readiness for programmatic assessment.

Indexed as

Collectivist cultureFeedbackHierarchical cultureOutcome-based assessmentProgrammatic assessment

Identifiers

PMID36276778
PMCPMC9583993

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.