Alterations of HDL subclasses in hyperlipidemia.

Yanhua Xu,M. Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-8981(03)00138-4

2003-06-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Taken Out of Context: Hazards in the Interpretation of Written Assessment Comments

Shiphra Ginsburg,Jennifer R Kogan,Andrea Gingerich,Meghan Lynch,Christopher J Watling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003047

Abstract:Purpose: Written comments are increasingly valued for assessment; however, a culture of politeness and the conflation of assessment with feedback lead to ambiguity. Interpretation requires reading between the lines, which is untenable with large volumes of qualitative data. For computer analytics to help with interpreting comments, the factors influencing interpretation must be understood. Method: Using constructivist grounded theory, the authors interviewed 17 experienced internal medicine faculty at 4 institutions between March and July, 2017, asking them to interpret and comment on 2 sets of words: those that might be viewed as "red flags" (e.g., good, improving) and those that might be viewed as signaling feedback (e.g., should, try). Analysis focused on how participants ascribed meaning to words. Results: Participants struggled to attach meaning to words presented acontextually. Four aspects of context were deemed necessary for interpretation: (1) the writer; (2) the intended and potential audiences; (3) the intended purpose(s) for the comments, including assessment, feedback, and the creation of a permanent record; and (4) the culture, including norms around assessment language. These contextual factors are not always apparent; readers must balance the inevitable need to interpret others' language with the potential hazards of second-guessing intent. Conclusions: Comments are written for a variety of intended purposes and audiences, sometimes simultaneously; this reality creates dilemmas for faculty attempting to interpret these comments, with or without computer assistance. Attention to context is essential to reduce interpretive uncertainty and ensure that written comments can achieve their potential to enhance both assessment and feedback.
Physician-led intervention improves critical care documentation and reimbursement.

M. Moseley,E. Adkins,R. Cooper,Daniel Wagner

2013-11-01

Abstract:
Evaluating the Quality of Written Feedback Within Entrustable Professional Activities in an Internal Medicine Cohort

Lorenzo Madrazo,Jennifer DCruz,Natasha Correa,Klajdi Puka,Sheri-Lynn Kane

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00222.1

Abstract:Background: Whether written comments in entrustable professional activities (EPAs) translate into high-quality feedback remains uncertain. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the quality of EPA feedback completed by faculty and senior residents. Methods: Using retrospective descriptive analysis, we assessed the quality of feedback from all EPAs for 34 first-year internal medicine residents from July 2019 to May 2020 at Western University in London, Ontario, Canada. We assessed feedback quality on 4 domains: timeliness, task orientation, actionability, and polarity. Four independent reviewers were blinded to names of evaluators and learners and were randomized to assess each EPA for the 4 domains. Statistical analyses were completed using R 3.6.3. Chi-square or Fisher's exact test and Cochran-Armitage test for trend were used to compare the quality of feedback provided by faculty versus student assessors, and to compare the effect of timely versus not timely feedback on task orientation, actionability, and polarity. Results: A total of 2471 EPAs were initiated by junior residents. Eighty percent (n=1981) of these were completed, of which 61% (n=1213) were completed by senior residents. Interrater reliability was almost perfect for timeliness (κ=0.99), moderate for task orientation (κ=0.74), strong for actionability (κ=0.81), and moderate for polarity (κ=0.62). Of completed EPAs, 47% (n=926) were timely, 85% (n=1697) were task oriented, 83% (n=1649) consisted of reinforcing feedback, 4% (n=79) contained mixed feedback, and 12% (n=240) had neutral feedback. Thirty percent (n=595) were semi- or very actionable. Conclusions: The written feedback in the EPAs was task oriented but was neither timely nor actionable. The majority of EPAs were completed by senior residents rather than faculty.
The Impact of Electronic Data to Capture Qualitative Comments in a Competency-Based Assessment System

Teresa M Chan,Stefanie S Sebok-Syer,Yusuf Yilmaz,Sandra Monteiro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.23480

2022-03-25

Cureus

Abstract:Introduction Digitalizing workplace-based assessments (WBA) holds the potential for facilitating feedback and performance review, wherein we can easily record, store, and analyze data in real time. When digitizing assessment systems, however, it is unclear what is gained and lost in the message as a result of the change in medium. This study evaluates the quality of comments generated in paper vs. electronic media and the influence of an assessor's seniority. Methods Using a realist evaluation framework, a retrospective database review was conducted with paper-based and electronic medium comments. A sample of assessments was examined to determine any influence of the medium on the word count and the Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score. A correlation analysis evaluated the relationship between word count and QuAL score. Separate univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to examine the influence of the assessor's seniority and medium on word count, QuAL score, and WBA scores. Results The analysis included a total of 1,825 records. The average word count for the electronic comments (M=16) was significantly higher than the paper version (M=12; p=0.01). Longer comments positively correlated with QuAL score (r=0.2). Paper-based comments received lower QuAL scores (0.41) compared to electronic (0.51; p<0.01). Years in practice was negatively correlated with QuAL score (r=-0.08; p<0.001) as was word count (r=-0.2; p<0.001). Conclusion Digitization of WBAs increased the length of comments and did not appear to jeopardize the quality of WBAs; these results indicate higher-quality assessment data. True digital transformation may be possible by harnessing trainee data repositories and repurposing them to analyze for faculty-relevant metrics.
Three-Dimensional Porous HxTiS2 Nanosheet-Polyaniline Nanocomposite Electrodes for Directly Detecting Trace Cu(II) Ions.

Xiaorong Gan,Huimin Zhao,Shuo Chen,Hongtao Yu,X. Quan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b00500

IF: 7.4

2015-05-19

Analytical Chemistry

Abstract:In the present work, three-dimensional porous HxTiS2 nanosheet-polyaniline (PANI) nanocomposites were first synthesized by a two-step method. First, HxTiS2 ultrathin nanosheets were prepared by the lithium intercalation and exfoliation method, followed by the surface polymerization reactions of aniline. The influences of the amount of HxTiS2 nanosheets on the nanocomposite morphology and electrochemical performances of the nanocomposites modified glass carbon electrode (HxTiS2 nanosheet-PANI/GCE) were investigated. The results demonstrated that the incorporation of HxTiS2 nanosheets as a suitable substrate can regulate the growth of PANI, enhance the electrode stability and improve interfacial electron transfer rates. In addition, based on the nanocomposites, we developed a novel electrochemical sensor to directly detect trace Cu(2+), and discovered that the coordination interaction between Cu(2+) cations and the N atoms of the imine moieties in PANI endowed the electrochemical sensor with high selectivity. Because of the synergetic effects of HxTiS2 nanosheets and PANI, the as-prepared electrochemical sensor exhibited highly sensitive and selective assaying of Cu(2+) with a detection limit of 0.7 nM (signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) equal to 3) and a linear range from 25 nM to 5 μM, under optimal conditions.
How Do Surgery Students Use Written Language to Say What They See? A Framework to Understand Medical Students' Written Evaluations of Their Teachers

David W Lim,Jonathan S White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000895

Abstract:Background: There remains debate regarding the value of the written comments that medical students are traditionally asked to provide to evaluate the teaching they receive. The purpose of this study was to examine written teaching evaluations to understand how medical students conceptualize teachers' behaviors and performance. Method: All written comments collected from medical students about teachers in the two surgery clerkships at the University of Alberta in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 were collated and anonymized. A grounded theory approach was used for analysis, with iterative reading and open coding to identify recurring themes. A framework capturing variations observed in the data was generated until data saturation was achieved. Domains and subdomains were named using an in situ coding approach. Results: The conceptual framework contained three main domains: "Physician as Teacher," "Physician as Person," and "Physician as Physician." Under "Physician as Teacher," students commented on specific acts of teaching and subjective perceptions of an educator's teaching values. Under the "Physician as Physician" domain, students commented on elements of their educator's physicianship, including communication and collaborative skills, medical expertise, professionalism, and role modeling. Under "Physician as Person," students commented on how both positive and negative personality traits impacted their learning. Conclusions: This framework describes how medical students perceive their teachers and how they use written language to attach meaning to the behaviors they observe. Such a framework can be used to help students provide more constructive feedback to teachers and to assist in faculty development efforts aimed at improving teaching performance.
Education Research: Perspectives and Experiences of Clinical Neurology Faculty Regarding the End-of-Rotation Assessment: A Qualitative Study

Marie Carl Eugene,Jose Montes-Rivera,Bobbie Ann Adair White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/NE9.0000000000200104

2023-11-29

Abstract:Introduction: End-of-rotation assessments (ERAs) completed by clinical faculty supervising medical students are an important component of medical student performance during clinical rotations. The quality and quantity of the formative and/or summative comments provided by faculty to students on ERAs vary. The goal of this study was to better understand the experiences, limitations, and barriers that may affect faculty at a single institution and its affiliated sites when completing this assessment. Methods: A qualitative study design was used, with phenomenology as the qualitative design of inquiry. Clinical faculty at 3 student rotation sites who worked with students and had filled out the electronic assessment form were asked to participate. A virtual platform was used to conduct semistructured interviews. Transcripts of the recorded interviews were reviewed and analyzed to identify emerging and recurrent themes. Results: Eleven faculty members (8 men and 3 women) were interviewed. Most participants felt that the time spent with medical students was limited, compromising the assessment process-particularly at sites where they are assigned to inpatient service for 1 week at a time. Longer intervals between end-of-rotation and completing the assessment limited details in the narrative components. Some participants were hesitant to assign students lower scores and to write negative comments in their assessments. Although constructive comments could be provided verbally, they were not always stipulated as comments on the assessment form. Many were concerned that written comments could negatively affect a student's future career. The participants recognized the importance and benefit of writing comments specific to the individual student. Many opined that providing prewritten examples of suggested comments would result in a generic assessment. Discussion: The experiences, limitations, and barriers that affected faculty members' ability to assess medical students at the end of the neurology rotation included limited time spent with students, a longer time taken to fill out the assessment form, and reluctance to write negative comments that could potentially affect a student's career. Specific comments about individual students were deemed important. Shorter and more frequent assessments, modifications to faculty schedules, faculty development initiatives, and adoption of a growth mindset are potential ways to overcome barriers faced by faculty.
Poverty and Inequality Analysis within a CGE Framework: A Comparative Analysis of the Representative Agent and Microsimulation Approaches

L. Savard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2005.00289.x

2005-04-23

Abstract:Two approaches have emerged in the use of CGE models in poverty and income distribution analysis: the traditional representative agent and the microsimulation approach using a large number of households to capture more heterogeneity. This article uses three simple CGE models with representative agent and microsimulation approaches to verify whether the two methods produce compatible results. The use of microsimulation does not appear to lead to different results or contribute significant value-added in impact analysis at the macroeconomic and sectoral levels. However, when poverty and inequality are the focus, the results produced by the two approaches are inverted, revealing that the choice of approach is crucial when the objective of the analysis relates to poverty and inequality.
Reading between the lines: faculty interpretations of narrative evaluation comments

Shiphra Ginsburg,Glenn Regehr,Lorelei Lingard,Kevin W Eva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12637

Abstract:Objectives: Narrative comments are used routinely in many forms of rater-based assessment. Interpretation can be difficult as a result of idiosyncratic writing styles and disconnects between literal and intended meanings. Our purpose was to explore how faculty attendings interpret and make sense of the narrative comments on residents' in-training evaluation reports (ITERs) and to determine the language cues that appear to be influential in generating and justifying their interpretations. Methods: A group of 24 internal medicine (IM) faculty attendings each categorised a subgroup of postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) and PGY2 IM residents based solely on ITER comments. They were then interviewed to determine how they had made their judgements. Constant comparative techniques from constructivist grounded theory were used to analyse the interviews and develop a framework to help in understanding how ITER language was interpreted. Results: The overarching theme of 'reading between the lines' explained how participants read and interpreted ITER comments. Scanning for 'flags' was part of this strategy. Participants also described specific factors that shaped their judgements, including: consistency of comments; competency domain; specificity; quantity, and context (evaluator identity, rotation type and timing). There were several perceived purposes of ITER comments, including feedback to the resident, summative assessment and other more socially complex objectives. Conclusions: Participants made inferences based on what they thought evaluators intended by their comments and seemed to share an understanding of a 'hidden code'. Participants' ability to 'read between the lines' explains how comments can be effectively used to categorise and rank-order residents. However, it also suggests a mechanism whereby variable interpretations can arise. Our findings suggest that current assumptions about the purpose, value and effectiveness of ITER comments may be incomplete. Linguistic pragmatics and politeness theories may shed light on why such an implicit code might evolve and be maintained in clinical evaluation.
Written reflection in assessment and appraisal: GP and GP trainee views

Pamela Curtis,Gordon Taylor,Ruth Riley,Tom Pelly,Michael Harris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2016.1277168

Abstract:Background: In the UK, evidence of written reflection is part of licensing and revalidation for general practitioners (GPs). However, there is little evidence of specific benefits compared to other forms of reflective practice. Aim: To seek GPs' and general practice (GP) trainees' views on the role of written reflection in learning and assessment. Design and setting: An online survey of 1005 GPs and GP trainees (GPTs) in the UK. Method: An anonymous questionnaire containing 38 attitudinal items was administered. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse Likert scale responses, thematic analysis for free-text responses. Results: In total 544 GPs and 461 GPTs completed the survey, with 842 (83.8%) agreeing they find verbal reflection with a colleague more useful than written reflection. Three quarters disagreed that written reflection is a way of identifying poorly performing GPs. Over 70% of respondents stated that summative, written reflection is a time-consuming, box-ticking exercise which distracts from other learning. They question its validity as part of assessment and state that its use may contribute to current difficulties with recruitment and retention to GP. Conclusions: For many GPs, written reflection is an onerous process rather than beneficial to their learning, indicating its continued use in assessment needs to be critically examined.
Carbazole-Substituted Iridium Complex as a Solid State Emitter for Two-Photon Intravital Imaging.

M. Lepeltier,F. Appaix,Y. Liao,F. Dumur,J. Marrot,T. Le Bahers,C. Andraud,C. Monnereau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ACS.INORGCHEM.6B01253

IF: 4.6

2016-09-12

Inorganic Chemistry

Abstract:A tris-cyclometalated iridium complex that bears two ligands functionalized by peripheral carbazole groups combines an intense solid state emission and a significant two-photon absorption cross section in the near-infrared. After incorporation into a physiological micellar suspension, it can be used for the intravital two-photon fluorescence microscopy of cerebral vasculature.
What Faculty Want: Academic and Community Emergency Physicians’ Perceptions of Learner Feedback

Yusuf Yilmaz,Kay Wu,Parnian Pardis,Rana Kamhawy,Shawn Mondoux,Teresa M Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.23546

2022-03-27

Cureus

Abstract:Introduction Faculty development is often deployed by central medical schools, with little guidance from end-users. How and what faculty members can use to improve their performance requires a deeper understanding from this user group. This study aims to explore how faculty perceive learners' feedback about their performance as educators. Methods This study is an explanatory mixed-method research, wherein community- and academic-based emergency medicine faculty members from nine regional hospitals were surveyed about their perceptions of various outcome measures for faculty development. Selected participants were invited to follow-up interviews. We analyzed the physicians' perceptions toward teaching and performance feedback data based on faculty's gender, role as academic or community physician, and work experience. Results The quantitative phase has 104 participants, and 15 of these were followed up with interviews. The gender of faculty does not have statistical or practical differences regarding their perceptions of learner feedback. Type of practice contains meaningful insights about the perception of learner feedback although it does not have a statistical difference. Moreover, an inverse trend exists between the physicians' years of experience and their perceived value of learner feedback. Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant difference in the faculty's experience level and their perceived value for the metric "quantity of feedback commentary compared to their peer group" (H(4) = 12.21, p = 0.02), specifically between junior and senior faculty (p = 0.007). Some faculty stated that experienced faculty may perceive they have a very well-established style. Conclusions Diversifying feedback sources and delivery may be useful for different groups of faculty members. Junior physicians are more interested in gaining feedback about the quantity of their written feedback to students compared to more senior physicians. Learner feedback holds promise to trigger continuous improvement in community sites for those who fall behind compared to the academic sites.
Developing teacher feedback literacy through self-study: Exploring written commentary in a critical language writing curriculum

Emma R. Britton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100709

IF: 3.9

2023-03-01

Assessing Writing

Abstract:Responding to student writing is complex, as many choices teachers make about the content, delivery, and purpose of feedback often remain beneath the surface of awareness. Incongruencies between teachers' feedback philosophies and practices are therefore common. Here, I analyze my own feedback practices, making a case for self-study as a method to promote teacher feedback literacy. Drawing upon classroom-data from a university developmental English writing context in the Northeastern US, I investigate my feedback practices alongside the implementation of a critical language awareness (CLA) curriculum. Deductively analyzing 301 comments provided to 27 students, I consider commentary's alignment to CLA principles. From this data, I selected five students' writing samples for further analysis, considering their writing development in interaction with CLA commentary. Results indicate some incongruencies between my philosophies and practices, as more than half of commentary showed weaker alignment to CLA principles, and it overwhelmingly addressed essay content (rather than organization or form). Commentary appeared to support the expansion of students' academic writing practices, especially in description, figurative language, argumentation, codemeshing, and source integration. I conclude reflecting on challenges associated with theoretically informed feedback and discuss the study's significance in expanding Lee's (2021) framework for writing teacher feedback literacy.

education & educational research,linguistics
"Just letting you know … " Underestimating others' desire for constructive feedback

Nicole Abi-Esber,Jennifer E Abel,Juliana Schroeder,Francesca Gino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000393

Abstract:People sometimes avoid giving feedback to others even when it would help fix others' problems. For example, only 2.6% of individuals in a pilot field study provided feedback to a survey administrator who had food or lipstick on their face. Five experiments (N = 1,984) identify a possible reason for the lack of feedback: People underestimate how much others want to receive constructive feedback. Initial experiments demonstrated this underestimation of others' desire for feedback in hypothetical scenarios (Experiment 1), recalled feedback experiences (Experiment 2), and real-time feedback among friends (Experiment 3). We further examine how people ascertain others' desire for feedback, testing how much they consider the potential consequences of feedback for themselves (e.g., discomfort giving feedback or harm to their relationship with the receiver) or the receiver (e.g., discomfort receiving feedback or value from feedback). While we found evidence that people consider both types of consequences, people particularly underestimated how much receivers value their feedback, a mechanism not extensively tested in prior research. Specifically, in Experiment 4, two interventions-making feedback-givers consider receivers' perspectives (enhancing consideration of receivers' consequences) or imagine someone else providing feedback (reducing consideration of givers' consequences)-both improved givers' recognition of others' desire for feedback compared to no intervention, but the perspective-taking intervention was most effective. Finally, Experiment 5 demonstrates the underestimation during a financially incentivized public-speaking contest and shows that giving less constructive feedback resulted in less improvement in feedback-receivers' performances. Overall, people consistently underestimate others' desire for feedback, with potentially negative consequences for feedback-receivers' outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
From constructive to critical and everywhere in between: education leaders' decision-making related to harsh feedback from learners about their teachers

Katherine Wisener,Erik Driessen,Amy Tan,Cary Cuncic,Kevin Eva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-024-10367-7

2024-09-02

Abstract:Feedback from learners is important to support faculty development, but negative feedback can harm teachers' motivation, engagement, and retention. Leaders of educational programs, therefore, need to balance enabling students' voices to be heard with maintaining teachers' enthusiasm and commitment to teaching. Given the paucity of research to explain or guide this struggle, we explored why and how education leaders grapple with negative learner feedback received about their teachers. Using an Interpretive Description methodology, 11 education leaders participated in semi-structured interviews. Discussion was stimulated by showing participants learner narratives they had previously asked to be deleted because they perceived the narrative to be overly critical. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed as codes were developed, refined, and combined into themes. Education leaders interpreted the scope, framing, and focus of the feedback to decide whether it was overly critical. Such determinations were combined with contextual considerations such as the teacher's personal circumstances, the learning environment and how the teacher might react to think through what potential damage the feedback might do to the teacher. Throughout the process, leaders struggled with whether protecting teachers risked not protecting learners and remained unsure about the ethics of censoring student voices. Our study offers direction regarding how to optimize feedback to teachers while minimizing risks inherent in sharing negative feedback with them. Implications include that there is value in: (1) extending feedback interpretation support to teachers, education leaders and learners; (2) situating upward feedback in a coaching dialogue; and, (3) applying the same principles recommended for the provision of feedback to learners, to teachers.
"I Think Many of Them Want to Appear to Have a Growth Mindset": Exploring Supervisors' Perceptions of Feedback-Seeking Behavior

Shiphra Ginsburg,Lorelei Lingard,Vijithan Sugumar,Christopher J Watling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005838

2024-11-01

Abstract:Purpose: Feedback seeking is an expected learner competency. Motivations to seek feedback are well explored, but we know little about how supervisors perceive such requests for feedback. These perceptions matter because how supervisors judge requests can affect the feedback they give. This study explores how supervisors perceive and attribute motivations behind feedback requests to better understand the benefits and hazards of feedback seeking. Method: Constructivist grounded theory was used to interview supervisors at the Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, from February 2020 to September 2022. Supervisors were asked to describe instances when they perceived feedback requests as being sincere or insincere, what led to their opinions, and how they responded. Transcripts were analyzed and coded in parallel with data collection; data analysis was guided by constant comparison. Results: Seventeen faculty were interviewed. Participants perceived 4 motivations when learners sought feedback: affirmation or praise; a desire to improve; an administrative requirement, such as getting forms filled out; and hidden purposes, such as making a good impression. These perceptions were based on assumptions regarding the framing of the initial request; timing; preexisting relationship with the learner; learner characteristics, such as insecurity; and learner reactions to feedback, particularly defensiveness. Although being asked for feedback was generally well received, some participants reported irritation at requests that were repetitive, were poorly timed, or did not appear sincere. Conclusions: Feedback seeking may prompt supervisors to consider learners' motivations, potentially resulting in a set of entangled attributions, assumptions, and reactions that shape the feedback conversation in invisible and potentially problematic ways. Learners should consider these implications as they frame their feedback requests and be explicit about what they want and why they want it. Supervisors should monitor their responses, ask questions to clarify requests, and err on the side of assuming feedback-seeking requests are sincere.
The stigma of underperformance in assessment and remediation

Damian J Castanelli,Elizabeth Molloy,Margaret Bearman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-024-10382-8

2024-10-16

Abstract:The stigma of underperformance is widely acknowledged but seldom explored. 'Failure to fail' is a perennial problem in health professions education, and learner remediation continues to tax supervisors. In this study, we draw on Goffman's seminal work on stigma to explore supervisors' accounts of judging performance and managing remediation in specialty anesthesia training in Australia and New Zealand. In doing so, we focus on what Goffman calls a "stigma theory" to explain the supervisors' reported practices. We performed a secondary analysis of nineteen interviews originally gathered using purposive sampling to explore how assessment decisions were made. We conducted a theory-informed thematic analysis of the supervisors' accounts to identify signifiers of stigma and underlying structures and beliefs. From both deductive and inductive analysis, we developed themes that demonstrate how the stigma of underperformance influences and is induced by supervisors' reticence to discuss underperformance, their desire to conceal remediation, and their differential treatment of trainees. We also found that accounts of trainees 'lacking insight' resembled stigma-induced stereotyping. We argue from our data that our cultural expectations of perfectionism propagate a stigma that undermines our efforts to remediate underperformance and that our remediation practices inadvertently induce stigma. We suggest that a multifaceted approach using both individual and collective action is necessary to change both culture and practice and encourage the normalisation of remediation.
Not in the file: How competency committees work with undocumented contributions

Anneke van Enk,Graham MacDonald,Rose Hatala,Andrea Gingerich,Jennifer Tam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15457

2024-06-20

Abstract:Introduction: Competence committees (CCs) centre their work around documentation of trainees' performance; undocumented contributions (i.e. informal, unrecorded material like personal judgements, experiential anecdotes and contextual information) evoke suspicion even though they may play a role in decision making. This qualitative multiple case study incorporates insights from a social practice perspective on writing to examine the use of undocumented contributions by the CCs of two large post-graduate training programmes, one in a more procedural (MP) speciality and the other in a less procedural (LP) one. Methods: Data were collected via observations of meetings and semi-structured interviews with CC members. In the analysis, conversations were organised into triptychs of lead-up, undocumented contribution(s), and follow-up. We then created thick descriptions around the undocumented contributions, drawing on conversational context and interview data to assign possible motivations and significance. Results: We found no instances in which undocumented contributions superseded the contents of a trainee's file or stood in for missing documentation. The number of undocumented contributions varied between the MP CC (six instances over two meetings) and the LP CC (22 instances over three meetings). MP CC discussions emphasised Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) observations, whereas LP CC members paid more attention to narrative data. The divergent orientations of the CCs-adding an 'advis[ing]/guid[ing]' role versus focusing simply on evaluation-offers the most compelling explanation. In lead-ups, undocumented contributions were prompted by missing and flawed documentation, conflicting evidence and documentation at odds with members' perceptions. Recognising other 'red flags' in documentation often required professional experience. In follow-ups, purposes served by undocumented contributions varied with context and were difficult to generalise; we, therefore, provide deeper analysis of two vignettes to illustrate. Conclusions: Our data suggest undocumented contributions often serve best efforts to ground decisions in documentation. We would encourage CC practices and policies be rooted in more nuanced approaches to documentation.
Examination of the Quality and Effectiveness of Peer Feedback and Self‐reflection Exercises Among Medical Students

Bruce Byrd,Charys Martin,Carol Nichols,Anna Edmondson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.29.1_supplement.690.12

2015-04-01

The FASEB Journal

Abstract:The ability to provide constructive feedback is essential for physicians. The small group anatomy lab setting provides an ideal environment for assessing this skill. Medical students provide feedback via evaluative ratings & comments for lab partners & themselves at the end of each semester. We examined the quality & effectiveness of this feedback, hypothesizing that individuals would be more self‐critical, that ratings would increase over time & that students would identify more strengths than areas of improvement. Students rated themselves significantly lower than peers on all evaluative questions. Over the year, self‐ratings significantly increased in communication & self‐awareness categories, while peer ratings significantly increased in participation, preparedness & self‐awareness. Narrative comments placed more emphasis on strengths. When evaluating peers, 59% of positive comments were associated with professionalism, 21% with personal behaviors & 19% with knowledge. Similar results were seen in self‐reflections. Peer constructive criticism was more evenly distributed between professionalism (47%), personal behaviors (33%) & knowledge (20%). However, more students critiqued their own knowledge deficiencies (30%). Results indicate that students may be uncomfortable giving criticism & evaluate themselves more critically than their peers; yet, they do respond & improve with feedback.
Long-term results of central venous access devices in children with haemophilia

M. Upadhyaya,M. Richards,S. Buckham,B. Squire

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-009-2380-4

2009-05-20

Abstract:

Alterations of HDL subclasses in hyperlipidemia.

Taken Out of Context: Hazards in the Interpretation of Written Assessment Comments

Physician-led intervention improves critical care documentation and reimbursement.

Evaluating the Quality of Written Feedback Within Entrustable Professional Activities in an Internal Medicine Cohort

The Impact of Electronic Data to Capture Qualitative Comments in a Competency-Based Assessment System

Three-Dimensional Porous HxTiS2 Nanosheet-Polyaniline Nanocomposite Electrodes for Directly Detecting Trace Cu(II) Ions.

How Do Surgery Students Use Written Language to Say What They See? A Framework to Understand Medical Students' Written Evaluations of Their Teachers

Education Research: Perspectives and Experiences of Clinical Neurology Faculty Regarding the End-of-Rotation Assessment: A Qualitative Study

Poverty and Inequality Analysis within a CGE Framework: A Comparative Analysis of the Representative Agent and Microsimulation Approaches

Reading between the lines: faculty interpretations of narrative evaluation comments

Written reflection in assessment and appraisal: GP and GP trainee views

Carbazole-Substituted Iridium Complex as a Solid State Emitter for Two-Photon Intravital Imaging.

What Faculty Want: Academic and Community Emergency Physicians’ Perceptions of Learner Feedback

Developing teacher feedback literacy through self-study: Exploring written commentary in a critical language writing curriculum

"Just letting you know … " Underestimating others' desire for constructive feedback

From constructive to critical and everywhere in between: education leaders' decision-making related to harsh feedback from learners about their teachers

"I Think Many of Them Want to Appear to Have a Growth Mindset": Exploring Supervisors' Perceptions of Feedback-Seeking Behavior

The stigma of underperformance in assessment and remediation

Not in the file: How competency committees work with undocumented contributions

Examination of the Quality and Effectiveness of Peer Feedback and Self‐reflection Exercises Among Medical Students

Long-term results of central venous access devices in children with haemophilia