ArticleCureus2026
A Learner-Driven Workshop to Enhance Feedback Engagement in Emergency Medicine.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFeedback is fundamental to Emergency Medicine (EM) education; however, residents frequently encounter obstacles when attempting to obtain and implement it. Learner-driven feedback strategies may strengthen feedback culture; however, methods to develop feedback literacy, the ability of learners to understand, value, and effectively use feedback, remain largely underexplored. We developed and evaluated a workshop to prepare EM residents to actively engage in the feedback process.
methodsA prospective pre-post survey was conducted at a single academic EM residency. Postgraduate year (PGY) 1-3 residents participated in a 1.5-hour interactive, practice-based workshop that included didactic components and hands-on activities focused on clarifying expectations, goal setting, and receiving feedback. Residents completed pre- and post-surveys using a five-point Likert scale to assess comfort. Knowledge retention was assessed one week later with a 15-question assessment. Pre- and post-surveys were evaluated by paired t-test analysis.
resultsThirty-one residents completed the pre-survey, and 30 completed both the post-survey and the knowledge assessment. Statistically significant improvements were observed in resident comfort for clarifying expectations (Δ = 0.67; p < 0.001), creating goals (Δ = 0.90; p < 0.001), comfort receiving feedback (Δ = 0.33; p = 0.01), seeking feedback (Δ = 0.40; p = 0.02), creating feedback action plans (Δ = 1.70; p < 0.001), reflecting on and implementing feedback (Δ = 0.40; p < 0.001), and recognizing feedback as the learner's responsibility (Δ = 0.53; p = 0.002). Perceptions of feedback's importance and impact on patient care remained high and unchanged. Knowledge retention among residents was high, with 91.1% of items (247/270) answered correctly. The strongest performance was observed in the domains of Expectations (87/90, 96.7%) and Goal Setting (88/90, 97.8%), while the Feedback Action Plan domain showed the lowest scores (73/90, 81.1%). Conclusion: A structured workshop significantly improved EM residents' comfort, knowledge, and skills in engaging with feedback. Early introduction of learner‑driven strategies may strengthen feedback culture and support professional development. This learner‑centered model represents a meaningful shift from traditional faculty‑directed feedback frameworks by placing primary ownership of the process in the hands of learners. Further research is needed to assess long‑term retention, clinical application, and the role of faculty development.
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.