Purpose
In many residency programs, residents receive feedback and assessment from both continuous (long-term) and episodic (short-term) preceptors. In our program, both types of preceptors give formative assessment in the clinical workplace which are documented in the form of FieldNotes. FieldNotes contain a brief summary of feedback shared with the resident about an observed clinical encounter. Given the relationships between residents and their continuous preceptors are likely to be different than those with their episodic preceptors, it is possible that this is reflected in the feedback content that is captured in the FieldNotes. Determining if this is the case using Hattie and Timperley’s feedback levels can provide a better understanding of how assessment behaviour might vary by type of supervisor-resident relationship.

Methods
We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study using secondary data analysis of de-identified FieldNotes completed at two teaching sites (N=4206) between 2015-2018. We coded the FieldNotes using Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) four levels of feedback: Self, Task, Process, and Self-Regulation, and compared FieldNotes completed by episodic versus continuous preceptors using independent-samples proportions to look for differences in feedback levels.

Results
Our analyses showed a higher proportion of FieldNotes completed by episodic preceptors (0.053 vs 0.018), z = 6.02, p < 0.001 was coded with Self level feedback. Feedback between episodic and continuous preceptors were comparable for 3 levels: Task, Process, and Self-Regulation.

Conclusion
Documented feedback in FieldNotes is comparable between continuous and episodic preceptors except for feedback at the Self level. Self level feedback appears to be more likely to be documented in episodic relationships where there is less opportunity for in depth feedback. This information may help programs improve documented feedback from different supervisor-resident relationships in the clinical teaching workplace.