Radiologist preferences for faculty development initiatives to improve resident feedback in the era of competency-based medical education.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Medical Education Online Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1080/10872981.2024.2357412
Laura Wong, Ethan Sacoransky, Wilma Hopman, Omar Islam, Andrew D Chung, Benjamin Y M Kwan
{"title":"Radiologist preferences for faculty development initiatives to improve resident feedback in the era of competency-based medical education.","authors":"Laura Wong, Ethan Sacoransky, Wilma Hopman, Omar Islam, Andrew D Chung, Benjamin Y M Kwan","doi":"10.1080/10872981.2024.2357412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Since 2022, all Canadian post-graduate medical programs have transitioned to a Competence by Design (CBD) model within a Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) framework. The CBME model emphasized more frequent, formative assessment of residents to evaluate their progress towards predefined competencies in comparison to traditional medical education models. Faculty members therefore have increased responsibility for providing assessments to residents on a more regular basis, which has associated challenges. Our study explores faculty assessment behaviours within the CBD framework and assesses their openness to opportunities aimed at improving the quality of written feedback. Specifically, we explore faculty's receptiveness to routine metric performance reports that offer comprehensive feedback on their assessment patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Online surveys were distributed to all 28 radiology faculty at Queen's University. Data were collected on demographics, feedback practices, motivations for improving the teacher-learner feedback exchange, and openness to metric performance reports and quality improvement measures. Following descriptive statistics, unpaired t-tests and one-way analysis of variance were conducted to compare groups based on experience and subspecialty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 89% (25/28 faculty). 56% of faculty were likely to complete evaluations after working with a resident. Regarding the degree to which faculty felt written feedback is important, 62% found it at least moderately important. A majority (67%) believed that performance reports could influence their evaluation approach, with volume of written feedback being the most likely to change. Faculty expressed interest in feedback-focused development opportunities (67%), favouring Grand Rounds and workshops.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Assessment of preceptor perceptions reveals that faculty recognize the importance of offering high-quality written feedback to learners. Faculty openness to quality improvement interventions for curricular reform relies on having sufficient time, knowledge, and skills for effective assessments. This suggests that integrating routine performance metrics into faculty assessments could serve as a catalyst for enhancing future feedback quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":47656,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education Online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11138222/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education Online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2357412","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Since 2022, all Canadian post-graduate medical programs have transitioned to a Competence by Design (CBD) model within a Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) framework. The CBME model emphasized more frequent, formative assessment of residents to evaluate their progress towards predefined competencies in comparison to traditional medical education models. Faculty members therefore have increased responsibility for providing assessments to residents on a more regular basis, which has associated challenges. Our study explores faculty assessment behaviours within the CBD framework and assesses their openness to opportunities aimed at improving the quality of written feedback. Specifically, we explore faculty's receptiveness to routine metric performance reports that offer comprehensive feedback on their assessment patterns.

Methods: Online surveys were distributed to all 28 radiology faculty at Queen's University. Data were collected on demographics, feedback practices, motivations for improving the teacher-learner feedback exchange, and openness to metric performance reports and quality improvement measures. Following descriptive statistics, unpaired t-tests and one-way analysis of variance were conducted to compare groups based on experience and subspecialty.

Results: The response rate was 89% (25/28 faculty). 56% of faculty were likely to complete evaluations after working with a resident. Regarding the degree to which faculty felt written feedback is important, 62% found it at least moderately important. A majority (67%) believed that performance reports could influence their evaluation approach, with volume of written feedback being the most likely to change. Faculty expressed interest in feedback-focused development opportunities (67%), favouring Grand Rounds and workshops.

Conclusion: Assessment of preceptor perceptions reveals that faculty recognize the importance of offering high-quality written feedback to learners. Faculty openness to quality improvement interventions for curricular reform relies on having sufficient time, knowledge, and skills for effective assessments. This suggests that integrating routine performance metrics into faculty assessments could serve as a catalyst for enhancing future feedback quality.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在以能力为基础的医学教育时代,放射科医生对教师发展计划的偏好,以改善住院医生的反馈。
导言:自 2022 年起,加拿大所有的医学研究生项目都在能力为本医学教育(CBME)框架内过渡到了能力设计(CBD)模式。与传统的医学教育模式相比,CBME 模式强调对住院医师进行更频繁的形成性评估,以评价他们在实现预定能力方面的进展。因此,教职员工有更大的责任为住院医师提供更多定期评估,这也带来了相关的挑战。我们的研究探讨了 CBD 框架下的教师评估行为,并评估了他们对旨在提高书面反馈质量的机会的开放程度。具体来说,我们探讨了教员对常规指标绩效报告的接受程度,这些报告提供了对其评估模式的全面反馈:方法:我们向皇后大学所有 28 名放射学教师发放了在线调查问卷。收集的数据涉及人口统计学、反馈实践、改善师生反馈交流的动机,以及对指标绩效报告和质量改进措施的开放程度。在描述性统计之后,进行了非配对 t 检验和单因子方差分析,以比较基于经验和亚专业的组别:回复率为 89%(25/28 名教员)。56%的教员有可能在与住院医师合作后完成评估。关于教员认为书面反馈的重要程度,62%的教员认为至少中等重要。大多数(67%)的教员认为,绩效报告会影响他们的评估方法,而书面反馈的数量是最有可能改变的。教员们对以反馈为重点的发展机会表示出兴趣(67%),最喜欢大查房和研讨会:结论:对戒酒师看法的评估显示,教师们认识到向学员提供高质量书面反馈的重要性。教员对课程改革质量改进措施的开放程度取决于是否有足够的时间、知识和技能进行有效评估。这表明,将常规绩效指标纳入教师评估可成为提高未来反馈质量的催化剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Education Online
Medical Education Online EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education Online is an open access journal of health care education, publishing peer-reviewed research, perspectives, reviews, and early documentation of new ideas and trends. Medical Education Online aims to disseminate information on the education and training of physicians and other health care professionals. Manuscripts may address any aspect of health care education and training, including, but not limited to: -Basic science education -Clinical science education -Residency education -Learning theory -Problem-based learning (PBL) -Curriculum development -Research design and statistics -Measurement and evaluation -Faculty development -Informatics/web
期刊最新文献
Medical law; promotion of medicine curriculum: a letter to editor. Tips for developing a coaching program in medical education. High- and low-achieving international medical students' perceptions of the factors influencing their academic performance at Chinese universities. A Medical Education Research Library: key research topics and associated experts. Financial barriers and inequity in medical education in India: challenges to training a diverse and representative healthcare workforce.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1