Summary of results
| Items | Pre-intervention | Post-intervention | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environment in which feedback provided was congenial | 1.83 ± 0.37 | 4.33 ± 1.99 | <0.001 |
| Feedback being provided was timely | 2.83 ± 2.32 | 3.69 ± 2.03 | 0.09 |
| My views were taken during the feedback session | 1.98 ± 1.54 | 3.98 ± 2.11 | <0.001 |
| Chance was given to assess my own strengths and weaknesses | 1.73 ± 1.51 | 3.93 ± 1.97 | <0.001 |
| Feedback given was non-judgmental | 1.60 ± 1.42 | 3.70 ± 2.07 | <0.001 |
| Feedback sessions focused on specific aspects | 2.10 ± 1.66 | 3.64 ± 1.79 | <0.001 |
| Feedback identified the root cause of the problems | 2.20 ± 1.67 | 3.78 ± 1.93 | 0.001 |
| Through feedback, ideas were shared to improve upon the weak or deficient areas | 2.12 ± 1.63 | 3.68 ± 1.95 | 0.001 |
| Commitment for follow up | 2.10 ± 1.71 | 3.37 ± 1.99 | 0.005 |