4.6 Article

Impact of a work-based feedback intervention on student performance during clinical placements in acute-care healthcare settings: a quasi-experimental protocol for the REMARK programme

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034945

关键词

formative feedback; education; students; social theory; protocol

资金

  1. Metro South Hospital and Health Service

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Current perspectives present feedback as a dynamic, dialogic process. It is widely accepted that feedback can have an impact on workplace performance, however, how dialogic feedback is enacted with the learner in authentic healthcare settings is less apparent. This paper seeks to describe the design and development of an implementation study to promote the learner voice in the feedback process and improve feedback encounters between learners and learning partners in healthcare settings. Methods and analysis A quasi-experimental study design will be used to evaluate whether implementation of a work-based intervention to improve feedback impacts student performance during clinical placements in healthcare settings. Student performance will be measured at three time points: baseline (pre), mid-placement (post-test 1) and end-placement (post-test 2) in keeping with standard assessment processes of the participating university. The intervention is underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory and involves a layered design that targets learners and learning partners using best-practice education strategies. Data regarding participants' engagement with feedback during clinical placements and participants' level of adoption of the intervention will be collected at the completion of the clinical placement period. Ethics and dissemination This study has ethics approval from both Griffith University and Metro South Health Human Research and Ethics committees. Dissemination of results will be local, national and international through forums, seminars, conferences and publications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据