Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38654360›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

Designing feedback processes in the workplace-based learning of undergraduate health professions education: a scoping review.

Javiera Fuentes-Cimma, Dominique Sluijsmans, Arnoldo Riquelme, Ignacio Villagran, Lorena Isbej, María Teresa Olivares-Labbe, Sylvia Heeneman

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Designing an Effective Ambulatory Medicine Clerkship.Journal of medical education and curricular development
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

7 authors.

Javiera Fuentes-CimmaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avenida Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile. jfuentesi@uc.cl.
Dominique SluijsmansRotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Arnoldo RiquelmeCentre for Medical and Health Profession Education, Department of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Ignacio VillagranDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avenida Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3130-8326
Lorena IsbejSchool of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4272-8484
María Teresa Olivares-LabbeSistema de Bibliotecas UC (SIBUC), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Sylvia HeenemanDepartment of Pathology, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Health Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFeedback processes are crucial for learning, guiding improvement, and enhancing performance. In workplace-based learning settings, diverse teaching and assessment activities are advocated to be designed and implemented, generating feedback that students use, with proper guidance, to close the gap between current and desired performance levels. Since productive feedback processes rely on observed information regarding a student's performance, it is imperative to establish structured feedback activities within undergraduate workplace-based learning settings. However, these settings are characterized by their unpredictable nature, which can either promote learning or present challenges in offering structured learning opportunities for students. This scoping review maps literature on how feedback processes are organised in undergraduate clinical workplace-based learning settings, providing insight into the design and use of feedback.

methodsA scoping review was conducted. Studies were identified from seven databases and ten relevant journals in medical education. The screening process was performed independently in duplicate with the support of the StArt program. Data were organized in a data chart and analyzed using thematic analysis. The feedback loop with a sociocultural perspective was used as a theoretical framework.

resultsThe search yielded 4,877 papers, and 61 were included in the review. Two themes were identified in the qualitative analysis: (1) The organization of the feedback processes in workplace-based learning settings, and (2) Sociocultural factors influencing the organization of feedback processes. The literature describes multiple teaching and assessment activities that generate feedback information. Most papers described experiences and perceptions of diverse teaching and assessment feedback activities. Few studies described how feedback processes improve performance. Sociocultural factors such as establishing a feedback culture, enabling stable and trustworthy relationships, and enhancing student feedback agency are crucial for productive feedback processes.

conclusionsThis review identified concrete ideas regarding how feedback could be organized within the clinical workplace to promote feedback processes. The feedback encounter should be organized to allow follow-up of the feedback, i.e., working on required learning and performance goals at the next occasion. The educational programs should design feedback processes by appropriately planning subsequent tasks and activities. More insight is needed in designing a full-loop feedback process, in which specific attention is needed in effective feedforward practices.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateWorkplaceFeedbackFormative FeedbackHealth OccupationsHumansLearningClinical clerkshipFeedbackFeedback processesFeedforwardFormative feedbackHealth professionsUndergraduate healthcare educationUndergraduate medical educationWorkplace learning

Identifiers

PMID38654360
PMCPMC11036781

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.