Appraisers’ modal evaluations of feedback reports A to H with reports grouped by the pattern of doctor’s feedback scores
| Report | Pattern of doctor’s feedback scores | Evaluative item, n/N (% participants) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall assessment of report | Level of concern about doctor’s performance | Acceptability of doctor’s performance | ||
| A | Fell within ‘normal distribution’ of scores on PQ and on CQ | Very good (64/100; 64) | Not at all (58/100; 58) | Clearly acceptable (73/100; 73) |
| E | Very good (54/88; 61) | Not at all (76/88; 86) | Clearly acceptable (86/88; 98) | |
| H | Very good (48/87; 55) | Not at all (64/87; 74) | Clearly acceptable (80/87; 92) | |
| F | Satisfactory (58/89; 65) | Minor only (62/89; 70) | Probably acceptable (47/89; 53) | |
| B | Outliera on PQ only | Satisfactory (42/95; 44) | Minor only (44/95; 46) | Probably acceptable (58/95; 61) |
| C | Outliera on CQ only | Satisfactory (45/93; 48) | Significant (48/93; 52) | Probably acceptable (63/93; 68) |
| G | Outliera on CQ only | Satisfactory (58/87; 67) | Minor only (55/87; 63) | Probably acceptable (63/87; 72) |
| D | Outliera on PQ and on CQ | Borderline (44/91; 48) | Significant (62/91; 68) | Probably acceptable (57/91; 63) |
↵a Outlying Patient Questionnaire (PQ) or Colleague Questionnaire (CQ) overall scores were >1.96 standard deviations below the mean PQ or CQ overall score (standardised Z score ≤−1.96) calculated for all doctors who participated in GMC questionnaire pilot work.3