ArticleJMIR research protocols2024
Surgical Residents' Perception of Feedback on Their Education: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFeedback is an essential tool for learning and improving performance in any sphere of education, including training of resident physicians. The learner's perception of the feedback they receive is extremely relevant to their learning progress, which must aim at providing qualified care for patients. Studies pertinent to the matter differ substantially with respect to methodology, population, context, and objective, which makes it even more difficult to achieve a clear understanding of the topic. A scoping review on this theme will unequivocally enhance and organize what is already known.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to identify and map out data from studies that report surgical residents' perception of the feedback received during their education.
methodsThe review will consider studies on the feedback perception of resident physicians of any surgical specialty and age group, attending any year of residency, regardless of the type of feedback given and the way the perceptions were measured. Primary studies published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese since 2017 will be considered. The search will be carried out in 6 databases and reference lists will also be searched for additional studies. Duplicates will be removed, and 2 independent reviewers will screen the selected studies' titles, abstracts, and full texts. Data extraction will be performed through a tool developed by the researchers. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis (content analysis) will be used to analyze the data. A summary of the results will be presented in the form of diagrams, narratives, and tables.
resultsThe findings of this scoping review were submitted to an indexed journal in July 2024, currently awaiting reviewer approval. The search was executed on March 15, 2024, and resulted in 588 articles. After the exclusion of the duplicate articles and those that did not meet the eligibility criteria as well as the inclusion of articles through a manual search, 13 articles were included in the review.
conclusionsConducting a scoping review is the best way to map what is known about a subject. By focusing on the feedback perception more than the feedback itself, the results of this study will surely contribute to gaining a deeper understanding of how to proceed to enhance internal feedback and surgical residents' learning progress.
trial registrationOpen Science Framework yexb; https://osf.io/yexkb. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/56727.
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.