Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40126849›Full record

ReviewIndian pediatrics2025

Transforming Feedback into Learning Throughout the Trajectory of Competency Based Medical Education.

Shun Ping Wu, Yu Fai Choi, Leena Patel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Indian pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

3 authors.

Shun Ping WuHong Kong College of Paediatricians, Aberdeen, Hong Kong. spwucollege@gmail.com.
Yu Fai ChoiPamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Chai Wan, Hong Kong.
Leena PatelDivision of Medical Education, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feedback is an essential learning tool in the professional development of doctors. Its importance extends from the undergraduate years to the advanced stages of medical practice. However, there are many barriers that prevent learners and teachers from engaging in the feedback process. In contrast to the traditional model of feedback as 'given by teachers' and learners expected to passively receive and use it, feedback literacy places the responsibility on learners. It is gained by constant, purposeful and coherent iterative practice. The development of medical competencies is a multi-layered process during which the learners' skills in feedback literacy (seeking, generating, processing and acting on feedback) and self-reflection become progressively sophisticated. Trainers themselves need to possess a high level of feedback literacy to effectively support learners. To maximise the powerful impact of feedback on achievement, feedback literacy should be embedded throughout the trajectory of competency-based medical education.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCompetency-Based EducationEducation, MedicalFeedbackFormative FeedbackLearningHumansCompetency-based educationExperiential learningSelf-assessmentSelf-evaluation

Identifiers

PMID40126849

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.