ABSTRACT
Background: The concept of feedback-seeking behaviour has been widely studied, but there is still a lack of understanding of this phenomenon, specifically in an Indonesian medical education setting. The aim of this research was to investigate medical students’ feedback-seeking behaviour in depth in one Indonesian medical school. Methods: A qualitative method was employed to explore the feedback-seeking behaviour of undergraduate medical students in the Faculty of Medicine at Universitas Lampung. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with four student groups and each group consisted of 7–10 students from the years 2012, 2013 and 2014. Data triangulation was carried out through FGDs with teaching staff, and an interview with the Head of the Medical Education Unit. Results: Study findings indicated that the motivation of students to seek feedback was underlain by the desire to obtain useful information and to control the impressions of others. Students will tend to seek feedback from someone to whom they have either a close relationship or whose credibility they value. The most common obstacle for students to seek feedback is the reluctance and fearfulness of receiving negative comments. Conclusions: Through the identification of factors promoting and inhibiting feedbackseeking behaviour, medical education institutions are enabled to implement the appropriate and necessary measures to create a supportive feedback atmosphere in the learning process.
ABSTRACT
Antecedentes. La generación de competencias para la investigación en medicina es fundamental para que los médicos apliquen lashabilidades científicas en su quehacer diario; los programas académicos que incluyen la formación de habilidades investigativasrequieren a su vez habilidades para la comunicación escrita en los alumnos. La retroalimentación constructiva es un medio comúnmenteempleado en medicina, por el cual el docente acompaña al alumno, dándole a conocer sus fortalezas, debilidades y oportunidadespara un mejor desempeño, mientras asegura una evaluación justa. A pesar de ello, su aplicación más difundida es en la práctica clínicay no en el aprendizaje de la redacción y comunicación científica. Objetivo. Evaluar el impacto de la retroalimentación constructiva enel desempeño de los estudiantes en sus propuestas de protocolos clínicos y epidemiológicos considerando aspectos de redacción ymetodológicos. Diseño. Estudio analítico, prospectivo. Lugar. Universidad Marista de Mérida, Yucatán, México. Participantes. Alumnosregulares que cursaron la materia Métodos Clínicos y Epidemiológicos de la carrera de Médico Cirujano durante los ciclos escolares2014-2015 y 2015-2016. Intervención. Se evaluaron los puntajes obtenidos en el protocolo de investigación antes y después de laretroalimentación constructiva. Resultados. La media de la puntuación inicial de los protocolos fue 8,3 ± 0,8 y la media posterior a laretroalimentación constructiva fue 9,4 ± 0,9; el incremento de las puntuaciones en promedio fue de 1,1 ± 0,1 con un valor de t=7,70p=0,000. Las habilidades para la comunicación escrita que mejoraron los alumnos fueron fundamentalmente: 1. El manejo del tema,2. La organización del texto, 3. Empleo del lenguaje escrito, redacción, y 4. Fuentes de información; los alumnos presentan todaslas ideas no propias en su escrito con las citas a la fuente de donde fueron extraídas...
Background: Research and written communication skills are essential in undergraduate medical education, because medical doctors are often involved in research, and written communication is part of a medical doctor's everyday routine. Academic medical programs that include training in clinical or epidemiological research require written communication aptitudes. Constructive feedback is a review technique commonly employed in medical education that involves the professor's close surveillance of the students performance and a clear communication to respectfully explain to students their strengths, weaknesses and opportunities of improvement, while ensuring a fair evaluation. Even though constructive feedback is common in clinical practice, it is rarely used in undergraduate medical training in scientific writing. Objective: To evaluate the impact of constructive feedback on the academic performance of students in their clinical or epidemiological research protocol proposals, involving written and methodological aspects. Design: Analytical, prospective study. Setting: Universidad Marista de Mrida, Yucat n, Mxico. Participants: Students in their fourth year of medical education. Intervention: The quantitative evaluations obtained in the research protocol proposals before and after the constructive feedback were compared in 103 students in their fourth year of medical education who were attending the Clinical and Epidemiological Research Methods course during 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 school years. Results: The mean of the initial score was 8.3 ñ 0.8, and the mean post constructive feedback was 9.4 ñ 0.9; the average score increase was 1.1 ñ0.10 with t=7.70 value, p=0.000. Students improved the following communication skills: 1. Theme presentation and review, 2. Organization of a scientific manuscript, 3. Use of written language, and 4. Use of information sources...
Subject(s)
Male , Female , Young Adult , Learning , Education, Medical, Undergraduate , Students, Medical , Research , Feedback, Psychological , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Background: Feedback in medical education is an integral and important constituent of teaching as it encourages and enhances the learners' knowledge, skills and professional performance. Feedback has to be delivered in an appropriate setting; it should focus on the performance and not on the individual; should be clear and specific; delivered in non-judgmental language; should emphasize positive aspects; be descriptive rather than evaluative; and should suggest measures for improvement. Methods: 20 Post Graduate Student from surgery department was selected for the study. Results: Constructive feedback is defined as the act of giving information to a trainee through the description of his/her performance in the observed situation. It emphasizes the strengths of the session and areas which require improvement. The processes of giving and receiving feedback are skills that can be acquired only with practice with improvement in Pg student’s skill and knowledge. Conclusion: To integrate the concept of feedback in medical education, training of the trainers pertaining to techniques of adult learning and how to give feedback to trainees are foremost requirements. Interactive feedback is indispensable in bringing about professional development and overall improvement in doctors.
ABSTRACT
El mini-CEX (mini clinical evaluation exercise) es un instrumento de evaluación del desempeño profesional a través de la observación directa del residente mientras participa de un encuentro con un paciente, la valoración de una serie de habilidades y destrezas clínicas con posterior provisión de feedback o devolución en su ámbito de trabajo. Se centra en una serie de habilidades que el residente debe demostrar durante el encuentro con un paciente y requiere que el docente documente ese desempeño en seis competencias. Es fácil de aplicar por los docentes porque se integra bien a la rutina del día a día en los diferentes escenarios clínicos. El tiempo estimado de esta interacción no debe superar los 20 minutos y debe repetirse al menos 8 veces al año con cada residente por diferentes docentes. Es de vital importancia que los docentes definan de antemano qué competencias se van a evaluar y cuáles son los estándares de desempeño mínimo que deberán alcanzar los residentes. La confección de una base de datos con la información de los formularios completados nos permitirá monitorizar el proceso de evaluación y efectuar las medidas correctivas pertinentes.
The mini-CEX (mini clinical evaluation exercise) is a tool for the assessment of professional performance of residents through direct observation of resident-patient encounter, evaluating clinical skills and providing subsequent feedback in the work setting. The exam focuses on the evaluation of resident's skills during resident-patient encounter. The evaluator must document resident's performance in six areas of competence. The exam is easy to apply as it fits in real life settings in the different clinical scenarios. The evaluation should not take more than 20 minutes and each resident should have 8 mini-CEX per year of training with different faculties. Faculties should previously define the areas of competence to evaluate and the minimum performance standards residents should reach. All the completed forms should be used to construct a database in order to monitor the evaluation process and make the necessary corrections.