Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39305401›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical psychology in medical settings2024

A Faculty Growth Perspective on Peer Review of Teaching: An Institution-Wide, Customizable Approach to Peer Review.

Krista Longtin, Tara Hobson, Matthew Holley, Nancy Van Note Chism, Mary E Dankoski, Megan M Palmer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Krista LongtinIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA. klongtin@iu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5625-3977
Tara HobsonIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-8491-7696
Matthew HolleyIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Nancy Van Note ChismIndiana University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Mary E DankoskiIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4871-9789
Megan M PalmerIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0967-2415

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As academic medical centers have moved away from using learner ratings of instruction as a demonstration of quality teaching in the promotion process, Indiana University School of Medicine sought to create a peer review of teaching system. We created our system in 2010 and have engaged in continuous quality improvement since. In these efforts, we sought to answer the question, "How can we create a system of peer review of teaching that provides high-quality feedback to faculty and encourages autonomy and growth?" Our peer review of teaching system includes a website, with a brief introduction to the concept of peer review, as well as a series of customizable forms that allows faculty and peer reviewers to choose items for observation and feedback based on teaching setting. This system, called the Peer Review Form Builder (PRFB), combines interactive technology with evidence-based faculty development and is innovative in structure and scope. On the macro level, departments and programs have seen success with the tool by engendering conversations on the values and effectiveness of teaching and education efforts. This systematic, tailored system of peer review of teaching has advanced the stature, quality, and innovation within all aspects of teaching throughout the institution. Further, we have incorporated these values into promotion and tenure documents, by encouraging consistent, systematic peer review as a primary source of evidence to demonstrate teaching effectiveness.

Indexed as

Faculty, MedicalPeer ReviewTeachingAcademic Medical CentersHumansIndianaQuality ImprovementStaff DevelopmentFeedbackPedagogyPeer Review of TeachingPromotionTenure

Identifiers

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.