ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Evolving Perceptions of Feedback in Medical Communication Training.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This exploratory study investigates how first-year international medical students' perceptions of feedback may evolve during simulated patient consultations (SPCs). Over an 8-month period, 10 students participated in 4 SPCs and completed structured surveys after each session, ranking the value of 4 feedback sources: simulated patient feedback, observer feedback, video-annotated peer feedback, and group discussion sessions. Surveys combined Likert-scale ratings with open-ended questions to capture both quantitative and qualitative insights. The findings suggest a possible preliminary framework for feedback preferences. Early in the course, students most highly valued simulated patient feedback for its direct relevance to patient interaction. As the SPCs progressed, appreciation for observer feedback, video-annotated peer feedback, and group discussions increased. By the final SPC, group discussion sessions were frequently regarded as the most valuable, as they provided opportunities for collaborative reflection and shared learning. These preliminary observations point toward a framework in which learners' feedback needs may shift from immediate, patient-centered input to more reflective and collaborative forms as they gain experience. The study highlights the potential importance of tailoring feedback strategies to students' developmental stages. Given the small sample size and single-institution context, the results should be interpreted cautiously and considered hypothesis-generating. Future research with larger, multi-institutional samples is needed to test and refine this framework.
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.