Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
| العنوان: | Effect of face-to-face verbal feedback compared with no or alternative feedback on the objective workplace task performance of health professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Christina E. Johnson, Mihiri P Weerasuria, Jennifer Lyn Keating |
| المصدر: | BMJ Open, Vol 10, Iss 3 (2020) BMJ Open |
| بيانات النشر: | BMJ Publishing Group, 2020. |
| سنة النشر: | 2020 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | Formative Feedback, Health Personnel, Applied psychology, Psychological intervention, feedback, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Formative assessment, Task Performance and Analysis, Humans, Medicine, Grading (education), Work Performance, Verbal Behavior, business.industry, health professions education, General Medicine, Publication bias, Medical Education and Training, Data extraction, Meta-analysis, Clinical Competence, business, medical education & training |
| الوصف: | ObjectiveVerbal face-to-face feedback on clinical task performance is a fundamental component of health professions education. Experts argue that feedback is critical for performance improvement, but the evidence is limited. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of face-to-face verbal feedback from a health professional, compared with alternative or no feedback, on the objective workplace task performance of another health professional.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched the full holdings of Ovid MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to 1 February 2019 and searched references of included studies. Two authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials investigating the effect of feedback, in which health professionals were randomised to individual verbal face-to-face feedback compared with no feedback or alternative feedback and available as full-text publications in English. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. For feedback compared with no feedback, outcome data from included studies were pooled using a random effects model.ResultsIn total, 26 trials met the inclusion criteria, involving 2307 participants. For the effect of verbal face-to-face feedback on performance compared with no feedback, when studies at high risk of bias were excluded, eight studies involving 392 health professionals were included in a meta-analysis: the standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.7 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.03; pConclusionsVerbal face-to-face feedback in the health professions may result in a moderate to large improvement in workplace task performance, compared with no feedback. However, the quality of evidence was low, primarily due to risk of bias and publication bias. Further research is needed. In particular, we found a lack of high-quality trials that clearly reported key components likely to influence performance.Trial registration numberCRD42017081796. |
| اللغة: | English |
| تدمد: | 2044-6055 |
| الوصول الحر: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::24ab88ac532ae709dc07c10036400370Test https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/3/e030672.fullTest |
| حقوق: | OPEN |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsair.doi.dedup.....24ab88ac532ae709dc07c10036400370 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 20446055 |
|---|