Evaluating Feedback Comments in Entrustable Professional Activities: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Abstract

Competency-based medical education (CBME) has transformed postgraduate medical training, prioritizing competency acquisition over traditional time-based curricula. Integral to CBME are Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs), that aim to provide high-quality feedback for trainee development. Despite its importance, the quality of feedback within EPAs remains underexplored. We employed a cross-sectional study to explore feedback quality within EPAs, and to examine factors influencing length of written comments and their relationship to quality. We collected and analyzed 1163 written feedback comments using the Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score. The QuAL aims to evaluate written feedback from low-stakes workplace assessments, based on 3 quality criteria (evidence, suggestion, connection). Afterwards, we performed correlation and regression analyses to examine factors influencing feedback length and quality. EPAs facilitated high-quality written feedback, with a significant proportion of comments meeting quality criteria. Task-oriented and actionable feedback was prevalent, enhancing value of low-stakes workplace assessments. From the statistical analyses, the type of assessment tool significantly influenced feedback length and quality, implicating that direct and video observations can yield superior feedback in comparison to case-based discussions. However, no correlation between entrustment scores and feedback quality was found, suggesting potential discrepancies between the feedback and the score on the entrustability scale. This study indicates the role of the EPAs to foster high-quality feedback within CBME. It also highlights the multifaceted feedback dynamics, suggesting the influence of factors such as feedback length and assessment tool on feedback quality. Future research should further explore contextual factors for enhancing medical education practices.