ArticleThe clinical teacher2025
Partners in Care: Training Healthcare Professionals in Using Patient Feedback.
Article in The clinical teacher, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Partners in Care: Training Healthcare Professionals in Using Patient Feedback.The clinical teacher · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients are the raison d'être of all those working in healthcare. Despite the recognised value of patient feedback, its integration into healthcare professionals' lifelong learning remains limited. At the same time, healthcare professionals have most of their contact with patients after completing their training, and with it, the biggest impact on patient care. We present the development and evaluation of an interprofessional, evidence-informed patient feedback training activity for healthcare professionals. APPROACH: Using a design-based research approach, we conducted interviews with 12 healthcare professionals and 10 patients to explore perspectives on patient feedback and lifelong learning. Insights from these interviews informed the design of a two-session training program, which we piloted in an academic hospital and evaluated through observations and a survey. The first training session covers theoretical aspects of and patients' lived experiences with patient feedback. In-between sessions, healthcare professionals are tasked with gathering patient feedback in daily practice. In the second session, participants discuss experiences and engage in peer-to-peer coaching facilitated by a trained patient. EVALUATION OF INNOVATION: The training fostered a safe space for open dialogue between patients and healthcare professionals. Professionals sharing personal accounts on their own lived experience with care helped participants recognise healthcare professionals' humanity and highlighted the value of patient feedback in professionals' continuing development. IMPLICATIONS: Engaging patients and healthcare professionals in co-designing training programs supports healthcare professionals' use of patient feedback. While trainings can help professionals incorporate patient feedback into their learning, genuine integration requires embedding feedback-seeking behaviours into daily practice.
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.