Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of the results of the evaluation of all items for series 1 and 2

From: The effect of written standardized feedback on the structure and quality of surgical lectures: A prospective cohort study

Item

Series 1

Series 2

p

Content/Structure

 Clear and organized presentation

3.58 ± 0.7

4.05 ± 1.1

0.038

 Presenting an advanced organizer

2.97 ± 0.86

3.7 ± 1.46

0.091

 Presents goal of the talk

1.86 ± 1.00

3.01 ± 1.83

0.012

 Key concept

3.89 ± 0.82

3.62 ± 1.14

0.44

 Audience interaction

3.58 ± 0.85

4.03 ± 0.6

0.047

 Appropriate amount of data

4.23 ± 1.02

4.49 ± 0.56

0.337

 Linking to previous knowledge

3.11 ± 0.7

3.98 ± 0.72

< 0.001

 Clear algorithm

3.22 ± 0.86

3.8 ± 0.92

0.009

 Conclusion

1.7 ± 1.07

3.05 ± 1.53

0.002

 Time management

2.89 ± 1.51

4.0 ± 0.72

0.002

Visualization

 Appropriate number of slides

4.5 ± 0.9

4.55 ± 0.42

0.740

 Adequate slide design

4.61 ± 0.53

4.34 ± 0.79

0.087

 Adequate audio and visual aids

4.45 ± 0.63

4.46 ± 0.55

0.743

 Adequate amount of text

4.26 ± 0.52

4.11 ± 0.75

0.448

 Congruence of text and visual aids

4.51 ± 0.64

4.61 ± 0.52

0.376

Presentation

 Speech flow

4.07 ± 0.94

4.47 ± 0.57

0.049

 Audibility and pronunciation

4.08 ± 0.74

4.36 ± 0.67

0.214

 Enthusiasm for the topic

3.63 ± 0.75

3.95 ± 0.74

0.072

 Respect for the audience

3.29 ± 0.7

3.43 ± 0.55

0.326

 Invitation to questions

3.67 ± 0.76

4.03 ± 0.74

0.036

 Clear sequence and development of the talk

3.85 + 0.65

4.16 + 0.89

0.325

 Language of slides

4.25 + 1.1

4.29 + 0.72

0.977

  1. Results per item on average for series 1 and series 2, presented in mean ± std. dev. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (from 5 = excellent to 1 = poor)
  2. p<.05 was rated as significant (bold)