Back

Beyond Qualification: a Video-Stimulated Interview Study on What Group Discussion of Audit and Feedback Adds to Professional Development in General Practice

van der Winden, D.; Nasori, M.; Mak - Van der Vossen, M.; van Dijk, N.; van Braak, M.; Bont, J.; Visser, M.

2025-06-22 medical education
10.1101/2025.06.20.25329918 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionModern healthcare demands continuing professional development (CPD) that bridges learning and practice and motivates health professionals. Current CPD activities often prioritize qualification, while socialization and subjectification purposes are considered vital in other educational contexts and could help to foster dynamic learning. Group discussion of audit and feedback (A&F) is a form of CPD that is used increasingly, and that may fulfill these needs. However, little is known about how this approach creates learning opportunities or what the group dynamic contributes. MethodIn this video-stimulated interview study we explored how a group of experienced general practitioners perceive the value of group discussion of A&F in their professional development, employing a constructivist paradigm. We first inductively analyzed our findings, using Thematic Analysis. A second deductive analysis followed, using Biestas concept of the three purposes of education (qualification, socialization and subjectification) as framework. ResultsAccording to our participants, group discussion of A&F allows for a reflective process that is formed by group discussion. The group helps deepen reflection and assists with the forming of individual and collective opinions. The meetings enhanced motivation for both individual and collective learning. Key conditions included a safe learning environment and a high level of enjoyability. The group meetings offered opportunities for all three purposes of education. DiscussionGroup discussion adds value to individual A&F by offering room for socialization and subjectification, as well as classic qualification purposes. It thereby offers a future proof form of CPD that could improve quality of healthcare and stimulate lifelong learning.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.