Concurrent versus terminal feedback: The effect of feedback delivery on lumbar puncture skills in simulation training.
Saved in:
| Title: | Concurrent versus terminal feedback: The effect of feedback delivery on lumbar puncture skills in simulation training. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Liu, Anna1, Duffy, Melissa2, Tse, Sandy3,4, Zucker, Marc3,4, McMillan, Hugh3,4, Weldon, Patrick3,4, Quet, Julie3,4, Long, Michelle3,4 |
| Source: | Medical Teacher. Aug2023, Vol. 45 Issue 8, p906-912. 7p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Psychology of medical students, *National competency-based educational tests, *Simulation methods in education, *Ability, *Training, *Pre-tests & post-tests, *Learning strategies, *Students, *Cognitive testing, *Anxiety, *Student attitudes, *Medical education, *Educational outcomes, Satisfaction, Randomized controlled trials, Lumbar puncture, Research funding, Statistical sampling |
| Geographic Terms: | Ontario |
| Abstract: | Simulation-based medical education (SBME) is widely used to teach bedside procedural skills. Feedback is crucial to SBME but research on optimal timing to support novice learners' skill development has produced conflicting results. We randomly assigned 32 novice medical students to receive feedback either during (concurrent) or after (terminal) trialing lumbar puncture (LP). Participants completed pre- and post-acquisition tests, as well as retention and transfer tests, graded on a LP checklist by two blinded expert raters. Cognitive load and anxiety were also assessed, as well as learners' perceptions of feedback. Participants who received concurrent feedback demonstrated significantly higher LP checklist scores (M = 91.54, SE = 1.90) after controlling for baseline levels, than those who received terminal feedback (M = 85.64, SE = 1.90), collapsed across post, retention, and transfer tests. There was no difference in cognitive load and anxiety between groups. In open-ended responses, participants who received concurrent feedback more often expressed satisfaction with their learning experience compared to those who received terminal feedback. Concurrent may be superior to terminal feedback when teaching novice learners complex procedures and has the potential to improve learning if incorporated into SBME and clinical teaching. Further research is needed to elucidate underlying cognitive processes to explain this finding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Medical Teacher is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Simulation-based medical education (SBME) is widely used to teach bedside procedural skills. Feedback is crucial to SBME but research on optimal timing to support novice learners' skill development has produced conflicting results. We randomly assigned 32 novice medical students to receive feedback either during (concurrent) or after (terminal) trialing lumbar puncture (LP). Participants completed pre- and post-acquisition tests, as well as retention and transfer tests, graded on a LP checklist by two blinded expert raters. Cognitive load and anxiety were also assessed, as well as learners' perceptions of feedback. Participants who received concurrent feedback demonstrated significantly higher LP checklist scores (M = 91.54, SE = 1.90) after controlling for baseline levels, than those who received terminal feedback (M = 85.64, SE = 1.90), collapsed across post, retention, and transfer tests. There was no difference in cognitive load and anxiety between groups. In open-ended responses, participants who received concurrent feedback more often expressed satisfaction with their learning experience compared to those who received terminal feedback. Concurrent may be superior to terminal feedback when teaching novice learners complex procedures and has the potential to improve learning if incorporated into SBME and clinical teaching. Further research is needed to elucidate underlying cognitive processes to explain this finding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0142159X |
| DOI: | 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2189540 |
