Mediating effect of reflection types: feedback on reflection-for-action and student perception of patient-centredness

Figures & data

Table 1. Characteristics of participants.

Variable	Sub-variable	Number of Cases(N)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	208	58.1
	Female	150	41.9
	Total	358	100
Year	Pre-medical Program 2^nd Year	54	15.1
	Medical Program 1^st Year	76	21.2
	Medical Program 2^nd Year	81	22.6
	Medical Program 3^rd Year	85	23.7
	Medical Program 4^th Year	62	17.3
	Total	358	100.0
Age Group	20s	302	84.4
	30s	56	15.6
	Total	358	100.0

Table 2. Valuables for the instrument.

Valuables	Sub-valuables	References
Reflection Types	Reflection in action (RiA)	Priddis and Rogers (2018)
	Reflection-on-action (RoA)
	Reflection-for-action (RfA)	[21] Priddis and Rogers (2018)
Patient centred communication (PCC)	Exchanging Information	[22]
	Fostering Healing Relationships
	Making Decisions
	Responding to Emotions
	Enabling Patient Self-Management
	Managing Uncertainty

Table 3. Descriptive analysis of factors.

Variable	Sub-variable	Number of Cases (N)	Mean (M)	Standard Deviation (SD)
Feedback on reflection-for-action (RfA-feedback)		358	4.09	0.81
	Reflection-in-Action (Type 1)	358	4.17	0.67
Reflection types	Reflection-on-Action (Type 2)	358	4.16	0.67
	Reflection-for-Action (Type 3)	358	4.27	0.68
	Total	358	4.19	0.58
Perceived Importance of PCC Education		358	4.43	0.51

Table 4. Correlations of factors.

Correlation Coefficient		Purpose of RfA-feedback	Reflection types			Perceived Importance of PCC Education
			Reflection -in-Action	Reflection -on-Action	Reflection -for- Action
Feedback on reflection-for-action (RfA-feedback)		1
Reflection types	Reflection-in-Action (Type 1)	.504^a***	1
	Reflection-on-Action (Type 2)	.504^a***	.606^a***	1
	Reflection-for-Action (Type 3)	.498^a***	.539^a***	.689^a***	1
Perceived Importance of PCC Education		.441^a***	.518^a***	.544^a***	.511^a***	1

^ap< 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

Table 5. The mediating effect of reflection-in-action.

Step	Dependent Variable	Explanatory Variable	B	S.E.	β	t
1	Type of Reflection 1:Reflection-in-Action	(Constant)	2.522	.152		16.539***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	.402	.037	.504	11.002***
		F= 121.040*** R^2 = .254 adjR^2 = .252 D-W= 2.078
2	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	3.305	0.124		26.588***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	0.276	0.030	0.441	9.260***
		F= 85.743*** R^2 = .194 adjR^2 = .192 D-W= 2.012
3	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	2.521	.153		16.476***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	.151	.032	.241	4.727***
		Type of Reflection 1:Reflection-in-Action	.311	.040	.396	7.769***
		F= 80.194*** R^2 = .311 adjR^2 = .307 D-W= 1.993

Figure 1. Partial mediating effect model of reflection-in-action (Type 1).

Table 6. The mediating effect of reflection-on-action.

Step	Dependent Variable	Explanatory Variable	B	S.E.	β	t
1	Type of Reflection 2:Reflection-on-Action	(Constant)	2.456	.158		15.592***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	.416	.038	.504	11.012***
		F= 121.254*** R^2 = .254 adjR^2 = .252 D-W= 2.054
2	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	3.305	0.124		26.588***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	0.276	0.030	0.441	9.260***
		F= 85.743*** R^2 = .194 adjR^2 = .192 D-W= 2.012
3	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	2.499	.147		17.019***
		Purpose of RfA-feedback	.140	.031	.223	4.442***
		Type of Reflection 2:Reflection-on-Action	.328	.038	.432	8.606***
		F= 88.706*** R^2 = .333 adjR^2 = .329 D-W= 1.960

Figure 2. Partial mediating effect model of reflection-on-action (Type 2).

Table 7. The mediating effect of reflection-for-action.

Step	Dependent Variable	Explanatory Variable	B	S.E.	β	t
1	Type of Reflection 3:Reflection-for-Action	(Constant)	2.563	.160		15.993***
		Purpose of Feedback for RfA	.417	.038	.498	10.848***
		F= 117.680*** R^2 = .248 adjR^2 = .246 D-W= 2.056
2	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	3.305	0.124		26.588***
		Purpose of Feedback for RfA	0.276	0.030	0.441	9.260***
		F= 85.743*** R^2 = .194 adjR^2 = .192 D-W= 2.012
3	Perceived Importance of PCC Education	(Constant)	2.561	.151		16.925***
		Purpose of Feedback for RfA	.155	.032	.248	4.856***
		Type of Reflection 3:Reflection-for-Action	.290	.038	.387	7.599***
		F= 78.580*** R^2 = .307 adjR^2 = .303 D-W= 2.083

Figure 3. Partial mediating effect model of reflection-for-action (Type 3).

Kember D, Leung DYP, Jones A, et al. Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 2000;25(4):381–395.

 Google Scholar

Reeve BB, David MT, Bann CM, et al. Psychometric evaluation and design of patient-centred communication measures for cancer care settings. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100(7):1322–1328.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The datasets used during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.