Joshua G Kornegay1, Aaron Kraut2, David Manthey3, Rodney Omron4, Holly Caretta-Weyer1, Gloria Kuhn5, Sandra Martin5, Lalena M Yarris1. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland OR. 2. BerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison WI. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine Wake Forest University Baptist Health Winston-Salem NC. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Baltimore MD. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine Wayne State University Detroit MI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to review and critically appraise the medical education literature pertaining to feedback and highlight influential papers that inform our current understanding of the role of feedback in medical education. METHODS: A search of the English language literature in querying Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsychINFO, PubMed, and Scopus identified 327 feedback-related papers using either quantitative (hypothesis-testing or observational investigations of educational interventions), qualitative methods (exploring important phenomena in emergency medicine [EM] education), or review methods.Two reviewers independently screened each category of publications using previously established exclusion criteria. Six reviewers then independently scored the remaining 54 publications using a qualitative, quantitative, or review paper scoring system. Each scoring system consisted of nine criteria and used parallel scoring metrics that have been previously used in critical appraisals of education research. RESULTS: Fifty-four feedback papers (25 quantitative studies, 24 qualitative studies, five review papers) met the a priori criteria for inclusion and were reviewed. Eight quantitative studies, nine qualitative studies, and three review papers were ranked highly by the reviewers and are summarized in this article. CONCLUSIONS: This inaugural Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academy critical appraisal highlights 20 feedback in medical education papers that describe the current state of the feedback literature. A summary of current factors that influence feedback effectiveness is discussed, along with practical implications for EM educators and the next steps for research.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to review and critically appraise the medical education literature pertaining to feedback and highlight influential papers that inform our current understanding of the role of feedback in medical education. METHODS: A search of the English language literature in querying Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsychINFO, PubMed, and Scopus identified 327 feedback-related papers using either quantitative (hypothesis-testing or observational investigations of educational interventions), qualitative methods (exploring important phenomena in emergency medicine [EM] education), or review methods.Two reviewers independently screened each category of publications using previously established exclusion criteria. Six reviewers then independently scored the remaining 54 publications using a qualitative, quantitative, or review paper scoring system. Each scoring system consisted of nine criteria and used parallel scoring metrics that have been previously used in critical appraisals of education research. RESULTS: Fifty-four feedback papers (25 quantitative studies, 24 qualitative studies, five review papers) met the a priori criteria for inclusion and were reviewed. Eight quantitative studies, nine qualitative studies, and three review papers were ranked highly by the reviewers and are summarized in this article. CONCLUSIONS: This inaugural Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academy critical appraisal highlights 20 feedback in medical education papers that describe the current state of the feedback literature. A summary of current factors that influence feedback effectiveness is discussed, along with practical implications for EM educators and the next steps for research.
Authors: Susan E Farrell; Wendy C Coates; Gloria J Khun; Jonathan Fisher; Philip Shayne; Michelle Lin Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Jonathan Fisher; Michelle Lin; Wendy C Coates; Gloria J Kuhn; Susan E Farrell; Lauren A Maggio; Philip Shayne Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Michelle Lin; Jonathan Fisher; Wendy C Coates; Susan E Farrell; Philip Shayne; Lauren Maggio; Gloria Kuhn Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Kevin W Eva; Heather Armson; Eric Holmboe; Jocelyn Lockyer; Elaine Loney; Karen Mann; Joan Sargeant Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2011-04-06 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: Aaron S Kraut; Rodney Omron; Holly Caretta-Weyer; Jaime Jordan; David Manthey; Stephen J Wolf; Lainie M Yarris; Stephen Johnson; Josh Kornegay Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2019-04-16