» Articles » PMID: 20515545

Validation of a Multi-source Feedback Tool for Use in General Practice

Overview
Journal Educ Prim Care
Date 2010 Jun 3
PMID 20515545
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Feedback from colleagues and patients is a core element of the revalidation process being developed by the General Medical Council. However, there are few feedback tools which have been specifically developed and validated for doctors in primary care. This paper presents data demonstrating the reliability and validity of one such tool. The CFEP360 tool combines feedback from the Colleague Feedback Evaluation Tool (CFET) and the Doctor's Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire (DISQ). The analysis of over 10 000 completed questionnaires presented here identifies that colleague feedback is essentially two-dimensional (i.e. clinical and non-clinical skills) and that patient feedback is one-dimensional. However, items from both scales also effectively predict combined global ratings, indicating that colleagues and patients are identifying similar levels of performance as accessed by the feedback. Doctors who receive low feedback scores may require further attention, meaning the feedback potentially has diagnostic value. Reliable feedback on this tool, as indicated by this analysis, requires 14 colleague responses and 25 patient responses, figures comparable to other MSF tools if CFEP360 is to be used for a high stakes performance evaluation and possible revalidation (generalisability statistic G> or =0.80). For lower stakes performance evaluations, such as personal development, responses from 11 colleagues and 16 patients will still return reliable results (G> or =0.70).

Citing Articles

Insights from using an outcomes measurement properties search filter and conducting citation searches to locate psychometric articles of tools used to measure context attributes.

Santos W, Hutchinson A, Rader T, Graham I, Watkins V, Candido L BMC Res Notes. 2023; 16(1):34.

PMID: 36906571 PMC: 10007786. DOI: 10.1186/s13104-023-06294-2.


A comparison of patient appraisal of professional skills for GPs in training participating in differing education programs.

Narayanan A, Vayro C, Greco M, Hanson D, Hanson J, Spike N BMC Med Educ. 2022; 22(1):669.

PMID: 36085053 PMC: 9462893. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03733-9.


Patient feedback on hospital pharmacists' consultation skills: A feasibility study using the Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire (ISQ).

Al-Jabr H, Twigg M, Katangwe-Chigamba T, Saadvandi R, Desborough J PLoS One. 2022; 17(7):e0268544.

PMID: 35834530 PMC: 9282534. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268544.


Are there differences between SIMG surgeons and locally trained surgeons in Australia and New Zealand, as rated by colleagues and themselves?.

Narayanan A, Greco M, Janamian T, Fraser T, Archer J BMC Med Educ. 2022; 22(1):516.

PMID: 35778704 PMC: 9250230. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03560-y.


Colleague appraisal of Australian general practitioners in training: an analysis of multisource feedback data.

Vayro C, Narayanan A, Greco M, Spike N, Hanson J, Mitchell B BMC Med Educ. 2022; 22(1):494.

PMID: 35751119 PMC: 9233327. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03559-5.