↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative exploration: questioning multisource feedback in residency education

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative exploration: questioning multisource feedback in residency education
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1270-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brie A. Yama, Michael Hodgins, Katherine Boydell, Sarah B. Schwartz

Abstract

Multisource feedback (MSF), involves the collection of feedback from multiple groups of assessors, including those without a traditional hierarchal responsibility to evaluate doctors. Allied healthcare professionals (AHCPs), administrative staff, peers, patients and their families may all contribute to the formative assessment of physicians. Theoretically, this feedback provides a thorough view of physician performance; however, the ability of MSF programs to consistently impact physician behavior remains in question. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore perceptions and prerequisites to an effective MSF program in postgraduate medical education from the perspectives of both pediatric residents and AHCPs. This exploratory study was conducted in a pediatric inpatient unit prior to implementation of a MSF program. Focus groups were conducted with purposefully recruited participants from three distinct groups: junior pediatric residents, senior pediatric residents, and AHCPs. Discussions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. Both residents and AHCPs expressed a strong interest in the concept of MSF. However, more in depth discussions identified barriers to residents' acceptance of, and AHCPs' provision of feedback. Roles and responsibilities, perceptions of expertise, hospital culture/interprofessionalism and power dynamics were identified as barriers to the acceptance and provision of feedback. All groups expressed interest in opportunities to engage in bi-directional feedback. The identified barriers and prerequisites to providing and accepting MSF suggest limits to the efficacy of the MSF process. Our findings suggest that these factors should be considered in the design and implementation of MSF programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 24%
Other 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 24 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 38%
Social Sciences 10 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Psychology 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 24 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,079,029
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,227
of 3,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,017
of 330,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#33
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,327 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.