Literature DB >> 15109324

Feedback and the mini clinical evaluation exercise.

Eric S Holmboe1, Monica Yepes, Frederick Williams, Stephen J Huot.   

Abstract

We studied the nature of feedback given after a miniCEX. We investigated whether the feedback was interactive; specifically, did the faculty allow the trainee to react to the feedback, enable self-assessment, and help trainees to develop an action plan for improvement. Finally, we investigated the number of types of recommendations given by faculty. One hundred and seven miniCEX feedback sessions were audiotaped. The faculty provided at least 1 recommendation for improvement in 80% of the feedback sessions. The majority of the sessions (61%) involved learner reaction, but in only 34% of the sessions did faculty ask for self-assessment from the intern and only 8% involved an action plan from the faculty member. Faculty are using the miniCEX to provide recommendations and often encourage learner reaction, but are underutilizing other interactive feedback methods of self-assessment and action plans. Programs should consider both specific training in feedback and changes to the miniCEX form to facilitate interactive feedback.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15109324      PMCID: PMC1492325          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30134.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  9 in total

1.  Interactive faculty development seminars improve the quality of written feedback in ambulatory teaching.

Authors:  Stephen M Salerno; Jeffrey L Jackson; Patrick G O'Malley
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Construct validity of the miniclinical evaluation exercise (miniCEX).

Authors:  Eric S Holmboe; Stephen Huot; Jeff Chung; John Norcini; Richard E Hawkins
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Improving clinical teaching. Evaluation of a national dissemination program.

Authors:  K M Skeff; G A Stratos; J Berman; M R Bergen
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1992-06

4.  Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics.

Authors:  C H Braddock; K A Edwards; N M Hasenberg; T L Laidley; W Levinson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999 Dec 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Feedback in clinical medical education.

Authors:  J Ende
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1983-08-12       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Cardiac auscultatory skills of internal medicine and family practice trainees. A comparison of diagnostic proficiency.

Authors:  S Mangione; L Z Nieman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-09-03       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  The mini-CEX (clinical evaluation exercise): a preliminary investigation.

Authors:  J J Norcini; L L Blank; G K Arnold; H R Kimball
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1995-11-15       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  The mini-CEX: a method for assessing clinical skills.

Authors:  John J Norcini; Linda L Blank; F Daniel Duffy; Gregory S Fortna
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2003-03-18       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Faculty development seminars based on the one-minute preceptor improve feedback in the ambulatory setting.

Authors:  Stephen M Salerno; Patrick G O'Malley; Louis N Pangaro; Gary A Wheeler; Lisa K Moores; Jeffrey L Jackson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.128

  9 in total
  29 in total

1.  An emerging renaissance in medical education.

Authors:  William T Branch; David E Kern
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Charting the road to competence: developmental milestones for internal medicine residency training.

Authors:  Michael L Green; Eva M Aagaard; Kelly J Caverzagie; Davoren A Chick; Eric Holmboe; Gregory Kane; Cynthia D Smith; William Iobst
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2009-09

3.  Internal Medicine Residents' Perspectives on Receiving Feedback in Milestone Format.

Authors:  Steven Angus; John Moriarty; Robert J Nardino; Amy Chmielewski; Michael J Rosenblum
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-06

4.  Validity and Feasibility of the Minicard Direct Observation Tool in 1 Training Program.

Authors:  Anthony A Donato; Yoon Soo Park; David L George; Alan Schwartz; Rachel Yudkowsky
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-06

Review 5.  The Foundation Programme assessment tools: an opportunity to enhance feedback to trainees?

Authors:  S Carr
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 2.401

6.  Introduction, development, and evaluation of the miniclinical evaluation exercise in postgraduate education of chiropractors.

Authors:  Inga Paravicini; Cynthia K Peterson
Journal:  J Chiropr Educ       Date:  2014-11-19

7.  Advancing Our Understanding of Narrative Comments Generated by Direct Observation Tools: Lessons From the Psychopharmacotherapy-Structured Clinical Observation.

Authors:  John Q Young; Rebekah Sugarman; Eric Holmboe; Patricia S O'Sullivan
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2019-10

8.  Analysis of Supervisors' Feedback to Residents on Communicator, Collaborator, and Professional Roles During Case Discussions.

Authors:  Alexandre Lafleur; Luc Côté; Holly O Witteman
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2021-04-16

Review 9.  The role of feedback in improving the effectiveness of workplace based assessments: a systematic review.

Authors:  Habiba Saedon; Shizalia Salleh; Arun Balakrishnan; Christopher H E Imray; Mahmud Saedon
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 2.463

10.  Quality of written narrative feedback and reflection in a modified mini-clinical evaluation exercise: an observational study.

Authors:  Elisabeth A M Pelgrim; Anneke W M Kramer; Henk G A Mokkink; Cees P M Van der Vleuten
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.