Accès gratuit
Numéro
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 16, Numéro 1, février 2015
Page(s) 79 - 84
Section Communication brève
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2015013
Publié en ligne 13 août 2015
  1. Ericsson KA. Deliberate Practice and the Acquisition and Maintenance of Expert Performance in Medicine and Related Domains. Acad Med 2004;79(10 suppl): S70-S81. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ericsson KA, Charness N, Feltovich PJ, Hoffman RR (Eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  3. Eva KW, Regehr G, Gruppen L. Blinded by “insight”. Self-assessment and its role in performance improvement. In BD Hodges and L Lingard (Ed.) The question of competence. London: Cornell University Press, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  4. Sargeant J, Bruce, D, Campbell, CM. Practicing Physicians’ Needs for Assessment and Feedback as Part of Professional Development. J Cont Educ Health Prof 2013;33:S54-S62. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Archer, J. State of the Science in Health Professional Education: Effective Feedback. Med Educ 2010:44: 101-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Eva KW, Regehr G. Effective Feedback for Maintenance of Competence: From Data Delivery to Trusting Dialogues. CMAJ 2013;185:463-4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bing-You RG, Trowbridge RL. Why medical educators may be failing at feedback. JAMA 2009;302: 1330-1. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Giroux M, Girard G. Favoriser la position d’apprentissage grâce à l’interaction superviseur-supervisé. Pédagogie Médicale 2009;10:193-210. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  9. Eva KW, Armson H, Holmboe E, Lockyer J, Loney E, Sargeant J. Factors Influencing Responsiveness to Feedback: on the Interplay Between Fear, Confidence, and Reasoning Processes. Adv in Health Sci Educ 2012;17:15-26. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bok GJ, Teunissen PW, Spruijt A, Fokkema JPI, Van Beukelen P, Jaarsma ADC, Van der Vleuten CPM: Clarifying Students’ Feedback-Seeking Behaviour in Clinical Clerkships. Med Educ 2013;47:282-91. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kogan JR, Conforti LN, Bernagbeo EC, Durning SJ, Hauer KE, Holmboe ES. Faculty Staff Perceptions of Feedback to Residents after Direct Observation of Clinical Skills. Med Educ 2012;46:201-15. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pelgrim E, Kramer AWM, Mokkink HGA, van der Vleuten, CPM. Factors Influencing Trainers’ Feedback-Giving Behavior: a Cross-Sectional Survey. BMC Medical Education 2014, 14: 65 [On-line] Disponible sur : http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/14/65 [Google Scholar]
  13. Sargeant J, Mann KV, Van der Vleuten CP, Metsemakers JF: Reflection: a Link Between Receiving and Using Assessment Feedback. Adv Health Sci Educ 2009;14:399-410. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Côté L, Bordage G, Content and Conceptual Frameworks of Preceptor Feedback Related to Residents’ Educational Needs. Acad Med 2012;87:1274-81. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Côté L, Gingras N. Réponses et cadres conceptuels des cliniciens enseignants lors de discussions de cas avec des internes en psychiatrie. Pédagogie Médicale 2013;14:169-86. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  16. Côté L, Gromaire P, Bordage G. Content and Rationale of Junior and Senior Preceptors Responding to Residents’ Educational Needs Revisited. Teach Learn Med, sous presse. [Google Scholar]
  17. Bordage G. Conceptual Frameworks to Illuminate and Magnify. Med Educ 2009;43:312-9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Jouquan J, Parent F, Audétat MC. Des analogies entre le raisonnement médical et l'évaluation formative. Revue française de linguistique appliquée 2013; XVIII(1):93-106. [Google Scholar]
  19. Irby, D. How Attending Physicians Make Instructional Decisions When Conducting Teaching Round. Acad Med 1992;67:630-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Irby, D. What Clinical Teachers Need to Know. Acad Med 1994;69:333-42. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Telio S, Ajjawi R, Regehr G. The “Educational Alliance” as a Framework for Reconceptualizing Feedback in Medical Education. Acad Med 2015;90: 609-14. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.