Cited by 48Innovations in Medical EducationMentoring and Academic DevelopmentCoaching Methods and Impact

Beyond Continuing Medical Education: Clinical Coaching as a Tool for Ongoing Professional Development

Iyasere, Christiana A., Baggett, Meridale, Romano, Jordan, Jena, Anupam, Mills, Gabrielle, Hunt, Daniel P.·2016·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Problem: For most physicians, the period of official apprenticeship ends with the completion of residency or fellowship, yet the acquisition of expertise requires ongoing opportunities to practice a given skill and obtain structured feedback on one’s performance. Approach: In July 2013, the authors developed a clinical coaching pilot program to provide early-career hospitalists with feedback from a senior clinical advisor (SCA) at Massachusetts General Hospital. A Hospital Medicine Unit–wide retreat was held to help design the SCA role and obtain faculty buy-in. Twelve SCAs were recruited from hospitalists with more than five years of experience; each served as a clinical coach to 28 early-career hospitalists during the pilot. Clinical narratives and programmatic surveys were collected from SCAs and early-career hospitalists. Outcomes: Of 25 responding early-career hospitalists, 23 (92%) rated the SCA role as useful to very useful, 20 (80%) reported interactions with the SCA led to at least one change in their diagnostic approach, and 13 (52%) reported calling fewer subspecialty consults as a result of guidance from the SCA. In response to questions about professional development, 18 (72%) felt more comfortable as an independent physician following their interactions with the SCA, and 19 (76%) thought the interactions improved the quality of care they delivered. Next Steps: To better understand the impact and generalizability of clinical coaching, a larger, longitudinal study is required to look at patient and provider outcomes in detail. Further refinement of the SCA role to meet faculty needs is needed and could include faculty development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000001131

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Iyasere, C. A., Baggett, M., Romano, J., Jena, A., Mills, G., & Hunt, D. P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
Iyasere, Christiana A.
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2016-12
Volume
91
Issue
12
Pages
1647-1650
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2327664508
Cited by
48
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (DP5OD017897)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Coaching Methods and Impact
Keywords
clinical coaching, continuing professional development, early-career physicians, hospitalists, feedback, continuing medical education, diagnostic approach, subspecialty consultation, physician independence, quality of care, faculty development
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Continuing, Hospitals, General, Humans, Massachusetts, Quality of Health Care, Hospital Medicine

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