Table 2.
Rating questions completed by general practitioner (GP) participants (preappraisal), by appraisers (after face-to-face appraisal) and by anonymous web-based portfolio assessors
| Question | Rating scale | Completed by |
| Reflection template | ||
| Source of feedback highlighted | ||
| 1. Important issues | Likert 1–7* | GP participant |
| 2. Concern in performance | Face-to-face appraiser (preappraisal) | |
| 3. Led to planned change | ||
| 4. Gave valuable feedback | ||
| Assessment of insightful practice template | ||
| Doctor demonstrated | ||
| 1. Satisfactory engagement with the TIPP process | Likert 1–7* | Face-to-face appraiser (postappraisal) |
| 2. Insight into the feedback provided on performance | Anonymous assessor (postappraisal) | |
| 3. Plans for appropriate action where applicable | ||
| 4. Engagement, insight and action (global rating of insightful practice) | ||
| 5. Suitability for recommendation as on track for revalidation without further opinion | Binary yes/no |
|
*
Likert scale descriptors (1–7): (1) strongly disagree; (3) disagree; (5) agree; (7) strongly agree.
TIPP, Tayside In-Practice Portfolio.