ArticleCureus2026
Qualitative Analysis of Feedback From a Primary Care Resident Clinic.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Residents spend a great deal of time with supervising faculty in their continuity clinic in primary care residencies. The long-term relationship between the resident and faculty provides an opportunity to provide feedback on the resident's knowledge, skills, and practice style. Materials and methods Focus group discussions with primary care residency supervising faculty at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center were analyzed to determine the goals, current knowledge, feelings, and barriers regarding providing feedback to residents during continuity clinic. Qualitative analysis using grounded theory identified themes in the focus group data, leading to an underlying theory of feedback provision to residents in a primary care resident clinic. Data were used to propose improvements to the current feedback process. Results Categories in the data included the longitudinal nature of the faculty-resident relationship, the need to manage emotional responses to feedback, faculty preparedness, and the difficulty of determining the content of the feedback to be provided. These influenced the three significant components of feedback: content, delivery, and reception. Conclusions Addressing components of feedback content, delivery, and the learner's attitude or receptivity can improve the quality and quantity of feedback given to residents in the clinic.
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.