Cited by 121Innovations in Medical EducationStudent Assessment and FeedbackClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Peer feedback as an aid to learning – What do we want? Feedback. When do we want it? Now!

Open access
Cushing, Annie, Abbott, Stephen, Lothian, Doug, Hall, Angela, Westwood, Olwyn M. R.·2011·Medical Teacher

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With 360° appraisals integral to professional life, learning how to give constructive feedback is an essential generic skill. AIM: To use a formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for skills acquisition and development in giving feedback, whilst facilitating awareness of the importance of communication skills in clinical practice. METHODS: Medical and nursing students took part in a formative OSCE. Using actors as simulated patients, a three-station OSCE circuit was repeated three times so that students could rotate through the roles as 'candidate', 'examiner' and 'observer'. As 'candidates', they received immediate feedback on their consultation from the 'examiner'/'observer'. The events were evaluated using a questionnaire and focus groups. RESULTS: Students immensely valued this learning event for considering expectations for a performance (91-100%). Concerns around giving peers feedback were acknowledged, and they were divided on preference for feedback from peers or tutors (48% versus 52%). But training in providing feedback and criteria for assessment were considered helpful, as was instruction by faculty to give corrective feedback to peers. CONCLUSIONS: Peer observation and professional accountability for giving constructive feedback enhanced awareness of their skills education and training needs. It also opened the dialogue for identifying opportunities for peer assessment and feedback to support work-based education and skills development.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/0142159x.2011.542522

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Peer assessment, when implemented with clear guidelines and adequate training, serves as a valuable complement to instructor-led evaluations, providing diverse perspectives on performance and promoting active engagement in the learning process.

    “When implemented with clear guidelines and adequate training, it serves as a valuable complement to instructor-led evaluations, providing diverse perspectives on performance while promoting active engagement in the learning process [86,87].”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ladyshewksy RK. Developing health professionals through the use of reciprocal peer coaching. In Herrmann A, Kulski MM, editors. Flexible futures in tertiary teaching. Proceedings of the 9th Annual teaching learning forum, 2000 February 2-4. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. 5http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/ladyshewsky.html4
  2. Nicol D, MacFarlane-Dick D. 2006. Rethinking formative assessment in HE: A theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Stud High Educ 31(2):199-218.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cushing, A., Abbott, S., Lothian, D., Hall, A., & Westwood, O. M. R.
Affiliations
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Westwood, Olwyn M. R.
Venue
Medical Teacher
Published
2011-01-28
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
e105-e112
ISSN
  • 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-187X
OpenAlex
W2034821349
Cited by
121
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Teacher (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Queen Mary University of London
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
peer feedback, constructive feedback, formative assessment, OSCE, standardized patients, communication skills, clinical skills training, peer observation, peer assessment, medical students, nursing students, professional accountability, workplace education
MeSH terms
Feedback, Humans, Learning, Peer Group, Physical Examination, Students, Medical, Students, Nursing, Time Factors, Patient Simulation, Focus Groups

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