biostudies-literatureUnknown9Buis CAM<h4>Objectives</h4>The present study aimed to investigate residents' preferences in dealing with personal multi-source feedback (MSF) reports with or without the support of a coach.<h4>Methods</h4>Residents employed for at least half a year in the study hospital were eligible to participate. All 43 residents opting to discuss their MSF report with a psychologist-coach before discussing results with the program director were included. Semi-structured interviews were conducted following individual coaching sessions. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered using field notes.<h4>Results</h4>Seventy-four percent (n= 32) preferred sharing the MFS report always with a coach, 21% (n= 9) if either the feedback or the relationship with the program director was less favorable, and 5% (n=2) saw no difference between discussing with a coach or with the program director. In the final stage of training residents more often preferred the coach (82.6%, n=19) than in the first stages (65%, n=13).  Reasons for discussing the report with a coach included her neutral and objective position, her expertise, and the open and safe context during the discussion.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Most residents preferred discussing multisource feedback results with a coach before their meeting with a program director, particularly if the results were negative. They appeared to struggle with the dual role of the program director (coaching and judging) and appreciated the expertise of a dedicated coach to navigate this confrontation. We encourage residency programs to consider offering residents neutral coaching when processing multisource feedback.International journal of medical education48-54https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC5834823biostudies-literatureProcessing multisource feedback during residency under the guidance of a non-medical coach.PMC5834823Eckenhausen MAWTen Cate OBuis CAMfalseProcessing multisource feedback during residency under the guidance of a non-medical coach.<h4>Objectives</h4>The present study aimed to investigate residents' preferences in dealing with personal multi-source feedback (MSF) reports with or without the support of a coach.<h4>Methods</h4>Residents employed for at least half a year in the study hospital were eligible to participate. All 43 residents opting to discuss their MSF report with a psychologist-coach before discussing results with the program director were included. Semi-structured interviews were conducted following individual coaching sessions. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered using field notes.<h4>Results</h4>Seventy-four percent (n= 32) preferred sharing the MFS report always with a coach, 21% (n= 9) if either the feedback or the relationship with the program director was less favorable, and 5% (n=2) saw no difference between discussing with a coach or with the program director. In the final stage of training residents more often preferred the coach (82.6%, n=19) than in the first stages (65%, n=13).  Reasons for discussing the report with a coach included her neutral and objective position, her expertise, and the open and safe context during the discussion.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Most residents preferred discussing multisource feedback results with a coach before their meeting with a program director, particularly if the results were negative. They appeared to struggle with the dual role of the program director (coaching and judging) and appreciated the expertise of a dedicated coach to navigate this confrontation. We encourage residency programs to consider offering residents neutral coaching when processing multisource feedback.2018-01-01T00:00:00Z2018 Feb2024-12-04T06:04:27.087Z2019-03-26T23:05:54ZS-EPMC58348232947804110.5116/ijme.5a7f.169d