Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Keep up to date with all the top stories and latest evidence with our hub page, including official congress videos and expert takeaways.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 7/2015

01-07-2015 | Original Research

The Quality of Written Feedback by Attendings of Internal Medicine Residents

Authors: Jeffrey L Jackson, MD MPH, Cynthia Kay, MD MSc, Wilkins C Jackson, HS, Michael Frank, MD

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 7/2015

Login to get access

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Attending evaluations are commonly used to evaluate residents.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the quality of written feedback of internal medicine residents.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

PARTICIPANTS

Internal medicine residents and faculty at the Medical College of Wisconsin from 2004 to 2012.

MAIN MEASURES

From monthly evaluations of residents by attendings, a randomly selected sample of 500 written comments by attendings were qualitatively coded and rated as high-, moderate-, or low-quality feedback by two independent coders with good inter-rater reliability (kappa: 0.94). Small group exercises with residents and attendings also coded the utterances as high, moderate, or low quality and developed criteria for this categorization. In-service examination scores were correlated with written feedback.

KEY RESULTS

There were 228 internal medicine residents who had 6,603 evaluations by 334 attendings. Among 500 randomly selected written comments, there were 2,056 unique utterances: 29 % were coded as nonspecific statements, 20 % were comments about resident personality, 16 % about patient care, 14 % interpersonal communication, 7 % medical knowledge, 6 % professionalism, and 4 % each on practice-based learning and systems-based practice. Based on criteria developed by group exercises, the majority of written comments were rated as moderate quality (65 %); 22 % were rated as high quality and 13 % as low quality. Attendings who provided high-quality feedback rated residents significantly lower in all six of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies (p <0.0005 for all), and had a greater range of scores. Negative comments on medical knowledge were associated with lower in-service examination scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Most attending written evaluation was of moderate or low quality. Attendings who provided high-quality feedback appeared to be more discriminating, providing significantly lower ratings of residents in all six ACGME core competencies, and across a greater range. Attendings’ negative written comments on medical knowledge correlated with lower in-service training scores.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
4.
van der Ridder JMM, Stokking KM, McGaghie WC, ten Cate OT. What is feedback in clinical education? Medical Education. 2008;42(2):189–97.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Kluger AN, DeNisi A. The effects of feedback intervention on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol Bull. 1996;119:254–84.CrossRef
6.
Berbano EP, Browning R, Pangaro L, Jackson JL. The impact of the Stanford Faculty Development Program on ambulatory teaching behavior. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:430–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
7.
Jackson JL, O'Malley PG, Salerno SM, Kroenke K. The teacher and learner interactive assessment system (TeLIAS): a new tool to assess teaching behaviors in the ambulatory setting. Teach Learn Med. 2002;14:249–56.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Salerno SM, O'Malley PG, Pangaro LN, Wheeler GA, Moores LK, Jackson JL. Faculty development seminars based on the one-minute preceptor improve feedback in the ambulatory setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:779–87.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
Salerno SM, Jackson JL, O'Malley PG. Interactive faculty development seminars improve the quality of written feedback in ambulatory teaching. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:831–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
10.
Sender-Liberman A, Liberman M, Steinert Y, McLeod P, Meterissian S. Surgery residents and attending surgeons have different perspectives of feedback. Med Teach. 2005;27(5):470–2.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Archer JC. State of the science in health professional education: effective feedback. Medical Education. 2010;44(1):101–8.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Jensen AR, Wright AS, Kim S, Horvath KD, Calhoun KE. Educational feedback in the operating room: a gap between resident and faculty perceptions. Am J Surg. 2012;204:248–55.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Bing-You RG, Towbridge RL. Why medical educators may be failing at feedback. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1330–1.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Gil DH, Heins M, Jones PB. Perceptions of medical school faculty members and students on clinical clerkship feedback. J Med Educ. 1984;59:856–64.PubMed
15.
16.
Bahar-Ozvaris S, Aslan D, Sahin-Hodoglugil N, Sayek I. A faculty development program evaluation: from needs assessment to long-term effects, of the teaching skills improvement program. Teach Learn Med. 2004;16:368–75.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Moss HA, Derman PB, Clement RC. Medical student perspective: working toward specific and actionable clinical clerkship feedback. Med Teach. 2012;34:665–7.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Frye AW, Hollingsworth MA, Wymer A, Hinds MA. Dimensions of feedback in clinical teaching: a descriptive study. Acad Med. 1996;71:S79–81.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Kogan JR, Conforti LN, Bernabeo EC, Durning SJ, Hauer KE, Holmboe ES. Faculty staff perceptions of feedback to residents after direct observation of clinical skills. Med Educ. 2012;46:201–15.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Delva D, Sargeant J, Miller S, et al. Encouraging residents to seek feedback. Med Teach. 2013;35:e1625–31.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Ende J, Pomerantz A, Erickson F. Preceptors' strategies for correcting residents in an ambulatory care medicine setting: a qualitative analysis. Acad Med. 1995;70:224–9.PubMedCrossRef
22.
23.
24.
Skeff KM, Stratos GA, Berman J, Bergen MR. Improving clinical teaching. Evaluation of a national dissemination program. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:1156–61.PubMedCrossRef
25.
ACGME Program requirements for graduate medical education in internal medicine. Accreditation council for graduate medical education . 7-1-2013. 12-22-2014.
26.
Kay C, Jackson JL, Frank M. The relationship between internal medicine residency graduate performance on the ABIM certifying examination, yearly in-service training examinations, and the USMLE Step 1 Examination. Acad Med 2014.
27.
Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, Van HR, Thorpe KE, Perrier L. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1094–1102.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Mann K, Gordon J, MacLeod A. Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009;14:595–621.PubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
Haber RJ, Avins AL. Do ratings on the American Board of Internal Medicine Resident Evaluation Form detect differences in clinical competence? J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9:140–5.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Thompson WG, Lipkin M Jr, Gilbert DA, Guzzo RA, Roberson L. Evaluating evaluation: assessment of the American Board of Internal Medicine Resident Evaluation Form. J Gen Intern Med. 1990;5:214–7.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Berbano EP, Browning R, Pangaro L, Jackson JL. The impact of the Stanford Faculty Development Program on ambulatory teaching behavior. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:430–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
33.
Hawkins RE, Sumption KF, Gaglione MM, Holmboe ES. The in-training examination in internal medicine: resident perceptions and lack of correlation between resident scores and faculty predictions of resident performance. Am J Med. 1999;106:206–10.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Durning SJ, Pangaro LN, Lawrence LL, Waechter D, McManigle J, Jackson JL. The feasibility, reliability, and validity of a program director's (supervisor's) evaluation form for medical school graduates. Acad Med. 2005;80:964–8.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Durning SJ, Cation LJ, Jackson JL. The reliability and validity of the American Board of Internal Medicine Monthly Evaluation Form. Acad Med. 2003;78:1175–82.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Caverzagie KJ, Iobst WF, Aagaard EM, et al. The internal medicine reporting milestones and the next accreditation system. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:557–9.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Holmboe ES, Fiebach NH, Galaty LA, Huot S. Effectiveness of a focused educational intervention on resident evaluations from faculty a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:427–34.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
38.
Laughlin T, Brennan A, Brailovsky C. Effect of field notes on confidence and perceived competence: survey of faculty and residents. Can Fam Physician. 2012;58:e352–6.PubMedCentralPubMed
39.
Mann K, van der Vleuten C, Eva K, et al. Tensions in informed self-assessment: how the desire for feedback and reticence to collect and use it can conflict. Acad Med. 2011;86:1120–7.
Metadata
Title
The Quality of Written Feedback by Attendings of Internal Medicine Residents
Authors
Jeffrey L Jackson, MD MPH
Cynthia Kay, MD MSc
Wilkins C Jackson, HS
Michael Frank, MD
Publication date
01-07-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 7/2015
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-015-3237-2

Other articles of this Issue 7/2015

Journal of General Internal Medicine 7/2015 Go to the issue

Original Research

Cognitive Function and Health Literacy Decline in a Cohort of Aging English Adults

Healing Arts: Materia Medica

Fragile

Original Research

A Patient Navigator Intervention to Reduce Hospital Readmissions among High-Risk Safety-Net Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Original Research

Minnesota’s Early Experience with Medical Home Implementation: Viewpoints from the Front Lines

Original Research

Self-Reported Health Status Predicts Other-Cause Mortality in Men with Localized Prostate Cancer: Results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study

Original Research

Tailoring Outreach Efforts to Increase Primary Care Use Among Homeless Veterans: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits