Medical Science Educator

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 57–60 | Cite as

Engaging Patients in Trainee Evaluations in Clinical Nutrition: a Pilot Intervention

  • Daphna J. SteinbergEmail author
  • Katherine Vandenbussche
Short Communication



Health professions trainee feedback rarely includes the patient voice, despite patients being experts in their own experience. Research supports including the patient voice; however, literature on the value of in-practice patient feedback is lacking.


A form was designed and implemented for patients to evaluate dietetic interns teaching a group class. Interns were surveyed to provide feedback.


Interns reported finding the feedback valuable and unique. The evaluations were felt to be credible.


Results support engaging patients in feedback for dietetic interns. Research should address different contexts, competencies other than communication and professionalism, and the impact to patients.


Feedback Evaluation Patient Trainee 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Partnership for Dietetic Education and Practice. The integrated competencies for dietetic education and practice. Version 2.0. 2013. Accessed 12 Jul 2018.
  2. 2.
    Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons Canada. CanMEDS. 2015. Accessed 12 Jul 2018.
  3. 3.
    Morgan A, Jones D. Perceptions of service user and carer involvement in healthcare education and impact on students’ knowledge and practice: a literature review. Med Teach. 2009;31(2):82–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wykurz G, Kelly D. Developing the role of patients as teachers: literature review. BMJ. 2002;325(7368):818–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bokken L, Rethans J, van Heurn L, Duvivier R, Scherpbier A, van der Vleuten C. Students’ views on the use of real patients and simulated patients in undergraduate medical education. Acad Med. 2009;84:958–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Greco M, Brownlea A, McGovern J. Impact of patient feedback on the interpersonal skills of general practice registrars: results of a longitudinal study. Med Educ. 2001;35:748–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoffman-Goetz DL, Ahmed R. Health literacy in Canada: a primer for students. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press Inc; 2014.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Watling C. The uneasy alliance of assessment and feedback. Perspect Med Educ. 2016;5:262–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harrison C, Könings K, Dannefer E, Schuwirth L, Wass V, van der Vleuten C. Factors influencing students’ receptivity to formative feedback emerging from different assessment cultures. Perspect Med Educ. 2016;5(5):276–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lefroy J, Watling C, Teunissen PW, Brand P. Guidelines: the do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. Perspect Med Educ. 2015;4:284–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association of Medical Science Educators 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sunnybrook Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Michael Garron Hospital, Toronto East Health NetworkEast YorkCanada

Personalised recommendations