Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Reflective Writing (RW) is increasingly being implemented in medical education. Feedback to students’ reflective writing (RW) is essential, but resources for individualized feedback often lack. We aimed to determine whether general practitioners (GPs) teaching students clinical skills co...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Alexander Kiss, Claudia Steiner, Paul Grossman, Wolf Langewitz, Peter Tschudi, Claudia Kiessling
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Canadian Medical Education Journal 2017
Materias:	Reflective writing medical students general practitioners feedback satisfaction Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/efaadb36b9614912b241bc56e2de9448
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:efaadb36b9614912b241bc56e2de9448
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:efaadb36b9614912b241bc56e2de94482021-12-03T17:53:36ZStudents’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial10.36834/cmej.369291923-1202https://doaj.org/article/efaadb36b9614912b241bc56e2de94482017-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cmej/article/view/36929https://doaj.org/toc/1923-1202Background: Reflective Writing (RW) is increasingly being implemented in medical education. Feedback to students’ reflective writing (RW) is essential, but resources for individualized feedback often lack. We aimed to determine whether general practitioners (GPs) teaching students clinical skills could also provide feedback to RW and whether an instruction letter specific to RW feedback increases students’ satisfaction. Methods: GPs were randomized to the two study arms using block randomization. GPs in both groups received an instruction letter on giving students feedback on clinical skills. Additionally, intervention group GPs received specific instructions on providing feedback to students’ RW. Students completed satisfaction questionnaires on feedback received on clinical skills and RW. T-tests were employed for all statistical analysis to compare groups. Results: Eighty-three out of 134 physicians participated: 38 were randomized to the control, 45 to the intervention group. Students were very satisfied with the feedback on RW and clinical skills regardless of tutors’ group allocation. A specific instruction letter had no additional effect on students’ satisfaction. Conclusion: Based on student satisfaction, GPs who give students feedback on clinical skills are also well suited to provide feedback on RW. This approach can facilitate the introduction of mandatory RW into the regular medical curriculum. Alexander KissClaudia SteinerPaul GrossmanWolf LangewitzPeter TschudiClaudia KiesslingCanadian Medical Education JournalarticleReflective writingmedical studentsgeneral practitionersfeedbacksatisfactionEducation (General)L7-991Medicine (General)R5-920ENCanadian Medical Education Journal, Vol 8, Iss 4 (2017)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Reflective writing medical students general practitioners feedback satisfaction Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	Reflective writing medical students general practitioners feedback satisfaction Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920 Alexander Kiss Claudia Steiner Paul Grossman Wolf Langewitz Peter Tschudi Claudia Kiessling Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
description	Background: Reflective Writing (RW) is increasingly being implemented in medical education. Feedback to students’ reflective writing (RW) is essential, but resources for individualized feedback often lack. We aimed to determine whether general practitioners (GPs) teaching students clinical skills could also provide feedback to RW and whether an instruction letter specific to RW feedback increases students’ satisfaction. Methods: GPs were randomized to the two study arms using block randomization. GPs in both groups received an instruction letter on giving students feedback on clinical skills. Additionally, intervention group GPs received specific instructions on providing feedback to students’ RW. Students completed satisfaction questionnaires on feedback received on clinical skills and RW. T-tests were employed for all statistical analysis to compare groups. Results: Eighty-three out of 134 physicians participated: 38 were randomized to the control, 45 to the intervention group. Students were very satisfied with the feedback on RW and clinical skills regardless of tutors’ group allocation. A specific instruction letter had no additional effect on students’ satisfaction. Conclusion: Based on student satisfaction, GPs who give students feedback on clinical skills are also well suited to provide feedback on RW. This approach can facilitate the introduction of mandatory RW into the regular medical curriculum.
format	article
author	Alexander Kiss Claudia Steiner Paul Grossman Wolf Langewitz Peter Tschudi Claudia Kiessling
author_facet	Alexander Kiss Claudia Steiner Paul Grossman Wolf Langewitz Peter Tschudi Claudia Kiessling
author_sort	Alexander Kiss
title	Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
title_short	Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
title_full	Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr	Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed	Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort	students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial
publisher	Canadian Medical Education Journal
publishDate	2017
url	https://doaj.org/article/efaadb36b9614912b241bc56e2de9448
work_keys_str_mv	AT alexanderkiss studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT claudiasteiner studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT paulgrossman studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT wolflangewitz studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT petertschudi studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT claudiakiessling studentssatisfactionwithgeneralpractitionersfeedbacktotheirreflectivewritingarandomizedcontrolledtrial
_version_	1718373125166465024

Students’ satisfaction with general practitioners’ feedback to their reflective writing: a randomized controlled trial

Ejemplares similares