Cargando…
Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis
Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are requir...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8675380/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34957327 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518 |
_version_ | 1784615860404486144 |
---|---|
author | Pentzek, Michael Wilm, Stefan Gummersbach, Elisabeth |
author_facet | Pentzek, Michael Wilm, Stefan Gummersbach, Elisabeth |
author_sort | Pentzek, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are required. The question of the present study is whether the student evaluation of an attachment in previously poorly evaluated practices improves after teaching physicians have received feedback from a colleague. Methods: Students in study years 1, 2, 3 and 5 evaluated their experiences in general practice attachments with two 4-point items (professional competence and recommendation for other students). Particularly poorly evaluated teaching practices were identified. A practising physician with experience in teaching and research conducted a personal feedback of the evaluation results with these (peer feedback), mainly in the form of individual discussions in the practice (peer visit). After this intervention, further attachments took place in these practices. The influence of the intervention (pre/post) on student evaluations was calculated in generalised estimating equations (cluster variable practice). Results: Of 264 teaching practices, 83 had a suboptimal rating. Of these, 27 practices with particularly negative ratings were selected for the intervention, of which 24 got the intervention so far. There were no post-evaluations for 5 of these practices, so that data from 19 practices (n=9 male teaching physicians, n=10 female teaching physicians) were included in the present evaluation. The evaluations of these practices were significantly more positive after the intervention (by n=78 students) than before (by n=82 students): odds ratio 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.31; p<.001). Conclusion: The results suggest that university institutes of general practice can improve student evaluation of their teaching practices via individual collegial feedback. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8675380 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | German Medical Science GMS Publishing House |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86753802021-12-23 Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis Pentzek, Michael Wilm, Stefan Gummersbach, Elisabeth GMS J Med Educ Article Objectives: The extent of university teaching in general practice is increasing and is in part realised with attachments in resident general practices. The selection and quality management of these teaching practices pose challenges for general practice institutes; appropriate instruments are required. The question of the present study is whether the student evaluation of an attachment in previously poorly evaluated practices improves after teaching physicians have received feedback from a colleague. Methods: Students in study years 1, 2, 3 and 5 evaluated their experiences in general practice attachments with two 4-point items (professional competence and recommendation for other students). Particularly poorly evaluated teaching practices were identified. A practising physician with experience in teaching and research conducted a personal feedback of the evaluation results with these (peer feedback), mainly in the form of individual discussions in the practice (peer visit). After this intervention, further attachments took place in these practices. The influence of the intervention (pre/post) on student evaluations was calculated in generalised estimating equations (cluster variable practice). Results: Of 264 teaching practices, 83 had a suboptimal rating. Of these, 27 practices with particularly negative ratings were selected for the intervention, of which 24 got the intervention so far. There were no post-evaluations for 5 of these practices, so that data from 19 practices (n=9 male teaching physicians, n=10 female teaching physicians) were included in the present evaluation. The evaluations of these practices were significantly more positive after the intervention (by n=78 students) than before (by n=82 students): odds ratio 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.10-1.31; p<.001). Conclusion: The results suggest that university institutes of general practice can improve student evaluation of their teaching practices via individual collegial feedback. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2021-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8675380/ /pubmed/34957327 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518 Text en Copyright © 2021 Pentzek et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Pentzek, Michael Wilm, Stefan Gummersbach, Elisabeth Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title | Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title_full | Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title_fullStr | Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title_short | Does peer feedback for teaching GPs improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? A pre-post analysis |
title_sort | does peer feedback for teaching gps improve student evaluation of general practice attachments? a pre-post analysis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8675380/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34957327 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001518 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pentzekmichael doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis AT wilmstefan doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis AT gummersbachelisabeth doespeerfeedbackforteachinggpsimprovestudentevaluationofgeneralpracticeattachmentsaprepostanalysis |