Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWakeling, J
dc.contributor.authorHolmes, S
dc.contributor.authorBoyd, A
dc.contributor.authorTredinnick-Rowe, JF
dc.contributor.authorCameron, N
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, M
dc.contributor.authorBryce, Marie
dc.contributor.authorArcher, Julian
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-11T13:47:40Z
dc.date.issued2019-02-01
dc.identifier.issn0894-1912
dc.identifier.issn1554-558X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/13290
dc.descriptionAmended Embargo release date to 12 months from publication date.
dc.description.abstract

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Introduction:</jats:title> <jats:p>Reflective practice has become the cornerstone of continuing professional development for doctors, with the expectation that it helps to develop and sustain the workforce for patient benefit. Annual appraisal is mandatory for all practicing doctors in the United Kingdom as part of medical revalidation. Doctors submit a portfolio of supporting information forming the basis of their appraisal discussion where reflection on the information is mandated and evaluated by a colleague, acting as an appraiser.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods:</jats:title> <jats:p>Using an in-depth case study approach, 18 online portfolios in Scotland were examined with a template developed to record the types of supporting information submitted and how far these showed reflection and/or changes to practice. Data from semistructured interviews with the doctors (n = 17) and their appraisers (n = 9) were used to contextualize and broaden our understanding of the portfolios.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results:</jats:title> <jats:p>Portfolios generally showed little written reflection, and most doctors were unenthusiastic about documenting reflective practice. Appraisals provided a forum for verbal reflection, which was often detailed in the appraisal summary. Portfolio examples showed that reflecting on continued professional development, audits, significant events, and colleague multisource feedback were sometimes considered to be useful. Reflecting on patient feedback was seen as less valuable because feedback tended to be uncritical.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Discussion:</jats:title> <jats:p>The written reflection element of educational portfolios needs to be carefully considered because it is clear that many doctors do not find it a helpful exercise. Instead, using the portfolio to record topics covered by a reflective discussion with a facilitator would not only prove more amenable to many doctors but would also allay fears of documentary evidence being used in litigation.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

dc.format.extent13-20
dc.format.mediumPrint
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins
dc.subjectreflective practice
dc.subjectappraisal
dc.subjectrevalidation
dc.subjectsupporting information
dc.subjectcontinuing professional development
dc.titleReflective practice for patient benefit: an analysis of doctors' appraisal portfolios in Scotland
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000480812500004&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume39
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/CEH.0000000000000236
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA23 Education
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/FoH - Community and Primary Care
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-11-26
dc.rights.embargodate2020-2-1
dc.identifier.eissn1554-558X
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionAccepted Manuscript
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1097/CEH.0000000000000236
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-02-01
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV