Frequently Asked Questions

Your respondent selections should represent patients and colleagues you have interacted with in the last year. If you are unable to provide the minimum number of respondents, please contact us at info@msf360.ca or call toll-free at 1-888-888-8888.

We only report aggregate results after receiving the required minimum number of survey responses to provide a valid assessment. Presenting ratings at an aggregate level helps protect respondent confidentiality, which helps ensure the quality of feedback participants receive is free from bias.

Yes, the patient surveys are designed so that any patient that you have interacted with in a clinical setting, even a single encounter, is able to provide feedback. This is also applicable to videoconference or telephone consultations. Should a question not be relevant for their particular visit, the patient may answer “Unable to Assess.”

Yes, you can provide a tablet or computer in your office to facilitate the completion of the online patient surveys. If using a shared device, we do recommend that you clear your browser’s cache and cookies on a regular basis. We also recommend that you turn off autofill to prevent duplicated narrative responses.

The diverse perspectives offered by many patients and colleagues provides a more reliable, informed view of your practice and increases the richness of the feedback you receive. To ensure statistical reliability, we need your self-assessment and completed surveys from 25 patients and 16 colleagues at minimum.

The focus of the assessment is on the CanMEDS and CanMEDS-Family Medicine roles of communication, collaboration and professionalism. This relates to a healthcare provider’s ability to communicate with patients and colleagues, and to behave professionally with honesty, integrity, commitment, compassion, respect and altruism.

When your MSF360 review and facilitation session are complete, you will be able to download a Certificate of Completion from your MSF360 Portal. Use this certificate to apply for credits directly with your CPD organization.

Results are not “good” or “bad.” The feedback is designed to help you develop a personalized action plan, focused on opportunities to improve your practice and the patient care you provide.

The focus of the assessment is on the CanMEDS and CanMEDS-Family Medicine roles of communication, collaboration and professionalism. This relates to a healthcare provider’s ability to communicate with patients and colleagues, and to behave professionally with honesty, integrity, commitment, compassion, respect and altruism.

Quantitative feedback alone is often interpreted as lacking meaning and specificity. The addition of narrative comments to MSF360 can play an important role in providing context to numerical ratings through the description of specific examples and contextual factors related to healthcare provider’s performance. In addition, feedback recipients report being more satisfied with feedback that includes narrative and report greater tendency to use such feedback to make future improvements.^1,2,3

1. Brutus, S. (2009).Words versus numbers: A theoretical exploration of giving and receiving narrative comments in performance appraisal.Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 144–157.

2. Overeem, K., Lombarts, M. J., Arah, O. A., Klazinga, N. S., Grol, R. P., & Wollersheim, H. C. (2010). Three methods of multi-source feedback compared: A plea for narrative comments and coworkers’ perspectives.Medical Teacher, 32(2), 141–147.

3. Vivekananda-Schmidt, P., MacKillop, L., Crossley, J., & Wade, W. (2013).Do assessor comments on a multi-source feedback instrument provide learner-centred feedback?Medical Education, 47(11), 1080–1088.

MSF360 is a multi-source feedback tool focusing on the roles of collaborator, communicator, and professional. Medical expert is more reliably assessed using other tools (e.g., chart review, stimulated chart recall, prescribing patterns, outcome metrics, etc.).

Healthcare providers do not usually directly observe each other’s performance in the medical expert role, so feedback about these behaviours is not often used to inform practice improvements.¹

Although MSF360 (and multi-source feedback in general) is not suitable to use in isolation for summative assessment or quality assurance purposes, combining MSF360 data with data on the medical expert role assessed by other tools is appropriate and could provide a more holistic assessment of a healthcare provider’s performance.

1. Sargeant, J., Mann, K., Sinclair, D., van der Vleuten, C., & Metsemakers, J. (2007).Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes. Medical Education, 41(6), 583–591.

Most MSF360 participants will receive a good result, and highlighting those who don’t do as well could cause some unintended consequences, such as emotional distress or focusing on issues that really are not problematic but fall below the “norm.”^1,2,3

To avoid this, MSF360 lays out the data for participants so they can review their strengths and opportunities of improvement, relative to themselves by rater group. By doing this, we hope to emphasize the intended purpose of MSF360, which is quality improvement.

1. Hill, J. J., Asprey, A., Richards, S. H., & Campbell J. L. (2012).
Multisource feedback questionnaires in appraisal and for revalidation: a qualitative study in UK general practice. British Journal of General Practice, 62(598), 314–321

2. DeNisi, A. S., & Kluger, A. N. (2000).Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree appraisals be improved? Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 129–139.

3. Sargeant, J., Mann, K., Sinclair, D., van der Vleuten, C., & Metsemakers, J. (2007).
Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes. Medical Education, 41(6), 583–591.