Cited by 306Innovations in Medical EducationClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsStudent Assessment and Feedback

Facilitated Reflective Performance Feedback: Developing an Evidence- and Theory-Based Model That Builds Relationship, Explores Reactions and Content, and Coaches for Performance Change (R2C2)

Open access
Sargeant, Joan, Lockyer, Jocelyn, Mann, Karen, Holmboe, Eric, Silver, Ivan, Armson, Heather, Driessen, Erik, MacLeod, Tanya +3 more·2015·Academic Medicine

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop and conduct feasibility testing of an evidence-based and theory-informed model for facilitating performance feedback for physicians so as to enhance their acceptance and use of the feedback. METHOD: To develop the feedback model (2011-2013), the authors drew on earlier research which highlights not only the factors that influence giving, receiving, accepting, and using feedback but also the theoretical perspectives which enable the understanding of these influences. The authors undertook an iterative, multistage, qualitative study guided by two recognized research frameworks: the UK Medical Research Council guidelines for studying complex interventions and realist evaluation. Using these frameworks, they conducted the research in four stages: (1) modeling, (2) facilitator preparation, (3) model feasibility testing, and (4) model refinement. They analyzed data, using content and thematic analysis, and used the findings from each stage to inform the subsequent stage. RESULTS: Findings support the facilitated feedback model, its four phases-build relationship, explore reactions, explore content, coach for performance change (R2C2)-and the theoretical perspectives informing them. The findings contribute to understanding elements that enhance recipients' engagement with, acceptance of, and productive use of feedback. Facilitators reported that the model made sense and the phases generally flowed logically. Recipients reported that the feedback process was helpful and that they appreciated the reflection stimulated by the model and the coaching. CONCLUSIONS: The theory- and evidence-based reflective R2C2 Facilitated Feedback Model appears stable and helpful for physicians in facilitating their reflection on and use of formal performance assessment feedback.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000000809

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sargeant, J., Lockyer, J., Mann, K., Holmboe, E., Silver, I., Armson, H., Driessen, E., MacLeod, T., Yen, W., Ross, K., & Power, M.
Affiliations
Dalhousie University (CA)
Corresponding author
Sargeant, Joan
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2015-12
Volume
90
Issue
12
Pages
1698-1706
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2397695628
Cited by
306
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 18
FWCI
23.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
performance feedback, physician feedback, feedback acceptance, reflective practice, coaching, performance evaluation (human resources), feasibility testing, realist evaluation, complex interventions
MeSH terms
Canada, Clinical Competence, Competency-Based Education, Education, Medical, Continuing, Feedback, Female, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Male, Models, Theoretical, Task Performance and Analysis, Evidence-Based Medicine, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review