Open AccessFeedback and the Mini Clinical Evaluation Exercise
Author(s) -
Holmboe Eric S.,
Yepes Monica,
Williams Frederick,
Huot Stephen J.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
journal of general internal medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.746
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 1525-1497
pISSN - 0884-8734
DOI - 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30134.x
Subject(s) - medicine , action (physics) , action plan , plan (archaeology) , medical education , ask price , self assessment , feedback control , psychology , pedagogy , history , ecology , physics , economy , archaeology , quantum mechanics , economics , biology , control engineering , engineering
We studied the nature of feedback given after a miniCEX. We investigated whether the feedback was interactive; specifically, did the faculty allow the trainee to react to the feedback, enable self‐assessment, and help trainees to develop an action plan for improvement. Finally, we investigated the number of types of recommendations given by faculty. One hundred and seven miniCEX feedback sessions were audiotaped. The faculty provided at least 1 recommendation for improvement in 80% of the feedback sessions. The majority of the sessions (61%) involved learner reaction, but in only 34% of the sessions did faculty ask for self‐assessment from the intern and only 8% involved an action plan from the faculty member. Faculty are using the miniCEX to provide recommendations and often encourage learner reaction, but are underutilizing other interactive feedback methods of self‐assessment and action plans. Programs should consider both specific training in feedback and changes to the miniCEX form to facilitate interactive feedback.