Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36605543›Full record

ArticleMedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources2022

A Systematic Approach to Provide Feedback to Presenters at Virtual and Face-to-Face Professional Meetings.

S Beth Bierer, Anna Cianciolo, Heeyoung Han, Janice Hanson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. "How Do You Think That Went?": A Peer Feedback Process for Workshop Presenters at an Academic Meeting.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026
    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.

S Beth BiererProfessor, Department of Medicine, and Director, Assessment and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University.ORCID 0000-0002-7952-8822
Anna CiancioloAssociate Professor, Department of Medical Education, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.ORCID 0000-0001-5948-9304
Heeyoung HanAssociate Professor, Department of Medical Education, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.ORCID 0000-0002-7286-2473
Janice HansonProfessor, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis.ORCID 0000-0001-7051-8225

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To promote their personal and professional growth, medical educators need practical, actionable feedback on their scholarship, as well as guidance for documenting their scholarship in educator portfolios. We offer a framework and resources to provide formative and summative feedback to faculty, administrators, and/or learners delivering an oral presentation at a face-to-face or virtual health professions education meeting. Methods: In 2014, the leadership of the Central Group on Educational Affairs (CGEA) meeting planning committee developed and piloted a process to provide individuals with formative and summative feedback on their oral CGEA research presentations at face-to-face meetings and create a transparent process for determining the Best Presentation Award. The feedback process was implemented for 7 years until revised in 2021 for the CGEA's first virtual meeting. Past and present meeting organizers conducted four focus groups in 2021 with presenters and peer reviewers via Zoom. Transcripts were analyzed for major themes using conventional content analysis. Results: To date, 102 presentation assessments have been conducted, including formative and summative assessments. Sixty-two volunteer assessors have participated, 19 (31%) of whom served for more than 2 years. Focus groups identified best practices and suggestions to improve the feedback process. Discussion: This resource offers a feasible, systematic process to provide individuals with formative feedback on presentations at professional conferences, promote a community of practice for personal and professional development, and create a transparent process for determining a Best Presentation Award. Participants valued providing and receiving feedback and recommended implementation at other professional meetings.

Indexed as

FacultyFormative FeedbackFeedbackHumansFaculty DevelopmentFeedbackPublishing/Scholarship

Identifiers

PMID36605543
PMCPMC9755373

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.