ArticleBMC medical education2025
How near-peer supervisors experience their own development in the supervisor role when shifting from written to oral interactive feedback: a qualitative interview study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral interactive feedback has been shown to help students learn more compared to written feedback. However, less is known of what student supervisors gain from engaging in feedback with peers or near peers. This study explored near-peer supervisors' experiences of development in their role as supervisors when shifting from one-way written feedback to oral interactive feedback.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative interview study with 10 medical student supervisors from an introductory course in person-centred medicine. In focus groups, they reflected upon how they experienced the difference between providing written and oral interactive feedback, and what impact it had on them. Analysis was conducted with systematic text condensation, a method for thematic cross-case analysis.
resultsThe supervisors reported that oral interactive feedback contributed to their development in various aspects of their supervisor role. Through feedback dialogues with students, they gained confidence and experienced both professional and personal growth. They also learned to adapt the feedback methods to different purposes. Additionally, they found their supervisor experiences relevant to meeting patients as physicians, describing improvement in communication skills, leadership and the ability to establish professional relationships, as well as acquiring new insights into their future role as physicians.
conclusionsInstitutions should recognise a potential reciprocal gain for both parts in a feedback process and consider facilitating oral interactive feedback more frequently, not least in education encouraging students to reflect upon own experiences and emotions. Providing oral interactive feedback can be a powerful learning opportunity. Student supervisors should be encouraged to explore the close connection between their role as supervisors and their future role as physicians.
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.