Cited by 8Innovations in Medical EducationCoaching Methods and ImpactMentoring and Academic Development

Effects of Longitudinal Coaching on Relationships and Feedback Processes in Pediatric Subspecialty Fellowships—An Interpretive Description Study

Open access
Jain, Priya G., McBride, Mary E., Caliendo, Anne, Eppich, Walter·2022·Journal of Graduate Medical Education

Abstract

Background: Coaching in graduate medical education provides a facilitative approach to feedback as well as opportunities for residents and fellows to engage with feedback and develop individualized improvement goals. Objective: To explore the roles and actions of successful coaches in longitudinal coaching relationships and how they enable feedback processes. Methods: Using interpretive description methodology, we performed semi-structured interviews with pediatrics fellows (n=11), faculty coaches (n=9), and program directors (n=2) from 2 pediatric subspecialty fellowship training programs at Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago. Both training programs had previously implemented longitudinal clinical coaching programs. Interview questions aimed to explore the roles and impacts of coaches within a longitudinal coaching program. Interviews took place in 2019 and 2020. Results: We identified 4 major actions to the coaching role in longitudinal coaching relationships: (1) establish the coach-fellow relationship; (2) prepare for the coaching conversation; (3) facilitate feedback dialogue; and (4) serve as the go-to person to raise uncomfortable issues. Additionally, nearly all participants expressed support for a longitudinal coaching program to support fellows' growth and development of personalized learning goals. Conclusions: By fulfilling these 4 key aspects to the coaching role, coaches in longitudinal relationships with coachees enable feedback processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4300/jgme-d-21-00936.1

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Jain, P. G., McBride, M. E., Caliendo, A., & Eppich, W.
Affiliations
  • Lurie Children's Hospital (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE)
Corresponding author
Jain, Priya G.
Venue
Journal of Graduate Medical Education
Published
2022-08-01
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
458-465
ISSN
  • 1949-8349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1949-8357
OpenAlex
W4291172188
Cited by
8
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Graduate Medical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Coaching Methods and Impact
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
Keywords
coach-client relationship, feedback mechanisms, graduate medical education, feedback dialogue
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Child, Feedback, Fellowships and Scholarships, Humans, Internship and Residency, Pediatrics, Surveys and Questionnaires

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