Skip to main content

Table 2 Peer reviewer ratings of the lectures before (series 1) and after (series 2) written feedback

From: Impact of peer feedback on the performance of lecturers in emergency medicine: a prospective observational study

  

Lecture series 1

Lecture series 2

  

No didactic training

Training

No didactic training

Training

Overall

R1

3.29 ± 1.53

3.85 ± 1.39

4.32 ± 0.93*

4.72 ± 0.53*

 

R2

3.29 ± 1.53

3.84 ± 1.39

4.29 ± 0.93*

4.71 ± 0.53*

 

IRR

0.84

 

0.84

 

Content & organisation

R1

2.73 ± 1.56

3.11 ± 1.49

4.16 ± 0.95°

4.52 ± 0.63°

 

R2

2.71 ± 1.56

3.10 ± 1.49

4.18 ± 0.95°

4.52 ± 0.63°

 

IRR

0.82

 

0.83

 

Visualisation

R1

3.66 ± 1.16

4.52 ± 0.56

4.51 ± 0.65*

4.93 ± 0.13*

 

R2

3.63 ± 1.16

4.52 ± 0.56

4.43 ± 0.65*

4.95 ± 0.13*

 

IRR

0.80

 

0.80

 

Delivery

R1

3.96 ± 1.26

4.52 ± 0.89

4.35 ± 0.91§

4.87 ± 0.31§

 

R2

3.96 ± 1.26

4.51 ± 0.89

4.36 ± 0.91§

4.83 ± 0.31§

 

IRR

0.9

 

0.89

 
  1. Data are presented as the mean + standard deviation for each category. Each item within a category was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (5 = excellent demonstration of skill, 3 = adequate and 1 = does not demonstrate).
  2. Significance of improvement after intervention: *p<0.05; °p<0.005, §not significant.
  3. R1: Rater 1; R2: Rater 2; IRR: Inter-rater reliability measured as the kappa coefficient.