-
Confounding factors in using upward feedback to assess the quality of medical training: a systematic review
-
Anli Yue Zhou Zhou
 , Paul Baker
-
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2014;11:17. Published online August 13, 2014
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2014.11.17
-
-
49,463
View
-
199
Download
-
10
Web of Science
-
8
Crossref
-
 Abstract
 PDF
- Purpose
Upward feedback is becoming more widely used in medical training as a means of quality control. Multiple biases exist, thus the accuracy of upward feedback is debatable. This study aims to identify factors that could influence upward feedback, especially in medical training. Methods: A systematic review using a structured search strategy was performed. Thirty-five databases were searched. Results were reviewed and relevant abstracts were shortlisted. All studies in English, both medical and non-medical literature, were included. A simple pro-forma was used initially to identify the pertinent areas of upward feedback, so that a focused pro-forma could be designed for data extraction. Results: A total of 204 articles were reviewed. Most studies on upward feedback bias were evaluative studies and only covered Kirkpatrick level 1-reaction. Most studies evaluated trainers or training, were used for formative purposes and presented quantitative data. Accountability and confidentiality were the most common overt biases, whereas method of feedback was the most commonly implied bias within articles. Conclusion: Although different types of bias do exist, upward feedback does have a role in evaluating medical training. Accountability and confidentiality were the most common biases. Further research is required to evaluate which types of bias are associated with specific survey characteristics and which are potentially modifiable.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by  - The impact of prior performance information on subsequent assessment: is there evidence of retaliation in an anonymous multisource assessment system?
Bahar Saberzadeh-Ardestani, Ali Reza Sima, Bardia Khosravi, Meredith Young, Sara Mortaz Hejri
Advances in Health Sciences Education.2024; 29(2): 531. CrossRef - Launching the ACE
Katrina Calvert, Sarah Janssens, Ian Symonds
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.2024; 64(4): 305. CrossRef - Upward Feedback: Exploring Learner Perspectives on Giving Feedback to their Teachers
Katherine Wisener, Kimberlee Hart, Erik Driessen, Cary Cuncic, Kiran Veerapen, Kevin Eva
Perspectives on Medical Education.2023;[Epub] CrossRef - Misperceptions and Missed Opportunities: A Qualitative Analysis of Barriers to Evaluating Surgical Teachers
Emily A. Flom, Nathan A. Coppersmith, Peter S. Yoo
Journal of Surgical Education.2023; 80(11): 1663. CrossRef - Only When They Seek: Exploring Supervisor and Resident Perspectives and Positions on Upward Feedback
Subha Ramani, Rachelle C. W. Lee-Krueger, Amanda Roze des Ordons, Jessica Trier, Heather Armson, Karen D. Könings, Jocelyn M. Lockyer
Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions.2022; 42(4): 249. CrossRef - Third year medical students impersonalize and hedge when providing negative upward feedback to clinical faculty
Doreen M. Olvet, Joanne M. Willey, Jeffrey B. Bird, Jill M. Rabin, R. Ellen Pearlman, Judith Brenner
Medical Teacher.2021; 43(6): 700. CrossRef - Faculty Perceptions of Formative Feedback from Medical Students
Lynne Robins, Sherilyn Smith, Amanda Kost, Heidi Combs, Patricia A. Kritek, Eileen J. Klein
Teaching and Learning in Medicine.2020; 32(2): 168. CrossRef - Surgeons have an opportunity to improve teaching quality through feedback provision
Katherine M. Heckman, Renaid B. Kim, Anderson Lee, Emma Chang, Niki Matusko, Rishindra M. Reddy, David T. Hughes, Gurjit Sandhu
Journal of Surgical Research.2018; 229: 164. CrossRef
|
KHPLEI
