Training activity information
Details
Prepare data for reporting for
- PERG
- VEP
- ERG
- EOG
Type
Entrustable training activity (ETA)
Evidence requirements
Evidence the activity has been undertaken by the trainee repeatedly, consistently, and effectively over time, in a range of situations. This may include occasions where the trainee has not successfully achieved the outcome of the activity themselves. For example, because it was not appropriate to undertake the task in the circumstances or the trainees recognised their own limitations and sought help or advice to ensure the activity reached an appropriate conclusion.
Reflection at multiple timepoints on the trainee learning journey for this activity.
Reflective practice guidance
The guidance below is provided to support reflection at different time points, providing you with questions to aid you to reflect for this training activity. They are provided for guidance and should not be considered as a mandatory checklist. Trainees should not be expected to provide answers to each of the guidance questions listed.
Before action
- What does success look like?
- Identify what is expected of you in relation to preparing data for reporting for the specified tests. Consider how the learning outcomes apply, including understanding tests, preparing data, identifying waveforms, and communicating effectively.
- What does successfully preparing electrophysiology data for reporting look like for PERG, VEP, ERG, and EOG tests, including correct annotation of waveforms and indications of factors that may alter reliability?
- Discuss with your training officer to gain clarity on what is expected of you in preparing data for reporting.
- What is your prior experience of this activity?
- Think about what you already know about data analysis, waveform annotation, or preparing clinical data for review or reporting.
- Consider possible challenges you might face, such as ambiguous waveforms, missing data points, difficulty annotating correctly according to standards, or identifying factors affecting data reliability, and think about how you might handle them.
- Recognise the scope of your own practice for this activity i.e. know when you will need to seek advice or help, and from whom, regarding complex waveform analysis or questionable data quality.
- Acknowledge how you feel about preparing data for reporting for the specified tests.
- What do you anticipate you will learn from the experience?
- Consider specific skills you want to develop in analysing and annotating electrophysiology waveforms accurately (normal and abnormal) and documenting relevant factors affecting data quality – drawing upon previous experiences.
- Identify specific insights you hope to gain regarding the correlation between waveforms and visual system anatomy/physiology, the impact of artefacts or technical issues on data presentation, and best practices for clear and concise data preparation.
- What additional considerations do you need to make?
- Consult actions identified following previous experience of data preparation or analysis in a clinical or scientific context, if any.
- Identify important information you need to consider before embarking on the activity, such as specific annotation conventions, ISCEV standards for reporting, data storage and management protocols, and common pitfalls in data presentation that can affect interpretation.
In action
- Is anything unexpected occurring?
- Are you noticing anything surprising or different from what you anticipate whilst you prepare data for reporting for the different diagnostic tests?
- Are you encountering situations, such as:
- Difficulty in summarising complex assessment findings or management decisions (PERG, VEP, ERG, EOG) into a concise report.
- During data review you realise that critical technical factors (e.g., filter settings or light levels used for ERG) are documented inconsistently, making the data reliability questionable.
- Difficulty in translating complex objective data (e.g., specific VEP findings or waveform annotation) into a concise summary suitable for multi-disciplinary communication.
- Difficulty in articulating the rationale for a finding, which has arisen if a discrepancy in the original clinical notes suggests a conflicting history or medication that might influence the ERG findings
- How are you reacting to the unexpected development?
- How is this impacting your actions? For example, are you responding to the situation appropriately? Are you adapting or changing the way in which you are preparing the data for reporting?
- How is it impacting upon your ability to prepare the data? Is it affecting your ability to undertake the activity independently?
- Consider the steps you are taking in the moment, such as:
- Are you immediately re-checking original data files or consulting previous notes to clarify missing or conflicting information?
- Are you consulting professional guidelines for clinical documentation or report writing templates?
- Are you seeking advice from a more experienced colleague or your training officer on how to phrase a difficult section, manage conflicting data, or ensure completeness?
- Are you changing your initial approach to report organisation or verbosity based on the complexity of the case or feedback on previous reports?
- If the issue relates to the initial clinical encounter, are you identifying and addressing information gaps proactively during the clinical encounter?
- How are you feeling in this moment? If you are experiencing difficulty summarising complex assessment findings (PERG, VEP, ERG, EOG), or you are realising during data review that critical technical factors (e.g., filter settings used for ERG) were documented inconsistently, consider:
- Is the missing or inconsistent technical documentation affecting your confidence in the reliability of the underlying data?
- Are you finding it difficult to adapt your report structure to translate complex objective data (e.g., VEP findings) into a concise summary suitable for multi-disciplinary communication?
- Do you feel positive you could reach a successful conclusion by resolving the inconsistencies and producing a comprehensive and defensible report?
- What is the conclusion or outcome?
- Identify how you are working within your scope of practice. For example, are you successfully managing the situation, or are you needing support because the report had legal implications or requires a specific consultant’s detailed input?
- What are you learning as a result of the unexpected development? For example, are you learning more effective ways to structure data preparation for clarity and impact, or gaining increased proficiency in translating complex objective data (e.g., EOG results) into a concise summary?
On action
- What happened?
- Begin by summarising the key points of the experience of meticulously preparing data for reporting for the specified tests.
- Consider specific events, actions, or interactions that felt important during the data preparation process, such as accurately applying waveform annotations, identifying and documenting factors that may alter the ability to reliably report data, or ensuring the data adhered to ISCEV standards. How did you feel during this experience?
- Include any ‘reflect-in-action’ moments where you had to adapt to the situation as it unfolded, for instance, needing to re-check the raw data due to an ambiguous waveform, or immediately seeking clarification on annotation protocols.
- How has this experience contributed to your developing practice?
- Identify what learning you can take from this experience regarding preparing data for reporting.
- What strengths did you demonstrate (e.g., high level of precision in annotation, adherence to documentation standards, analytical skill in identifying factors affecting data reliability)?
- What skills and/or knowledge gaps were evident (e.g., unfamiliarity with the full requirements for annotation of complex waveforms or difficulty ensuring the record was sufficiently comprehensive to maintain professional accountability)?
- Compare this experience against previous data preparation activities. Has your practice in ensuring data integrity and quality improved?
- Identify any challenges you experienced during data preparation (e.g., complex waveform analysis, time constraints) and how you reacted to these.
- Acknowledge any changes in your own feelings now that you are looking back on the experience.
- What will you take from the experience moving forward?
- Identify the actions or you will now take to support the assimilation of what you have learned, including from any feedback you received regarding your preparation of the data.
- What will you do differently next time you prepare data for reporting?
- Do you need to practise any aspect of data preparation further? E.g., Practising routinely reviewing ISCEV standards for specific annotations, or establishing a robust verification protocol to ensure the accuracy of all measured parameters before data hand-off.
Beyond action
- Have you revisited the experiences?
- Have you reviewed your actions from your previous reflections for preparing data for reporting?
- What specific actions did you previously identify to improve your practice related to precision in waveform annotation, adherence to ISCEV documentation standards, or accurately identifying and documenting factors affecting data reliability?
- Have you completed these previously identified actions? If so, how did completing them impact your subsequent performance of this activity? Are you ready to demonstrate this new learning confidently and consistently when preparing data for reporting?
- Discuss with an expert or peer the nuances of complex waveform analysis and documentation. Has their experience or your shared analysis revealed new insights into data integrity and professional accountability?
- How have these experiences impacted upon current practice?
- Consider how the accumulated learning from performing or reflecting on preparing data for reporting will support you in preparing for relevant observed ‘in-person’ assessments for this module, such as Case-Based Discussions (CBDs). This relates specifically to demonstrating the ability to prepare data for reporting and accurately identify potential sites of dysfunction.
- How has your practice related to preparing data for reporting developed and evolved over time, including recognising when complex data interpretation or specific medico-legal documentation requirements are beyond your scope of practice?
Relevant learning outcomes
| # | Outcome |
|---|---|
| # 1 |
Outcome
Demonstrate a critical understanding of electrophysiological tests used in the diagnosis of visual disorders. |
| # 4 |
Outcome
Prepare data obtained for reporting, including correct annotation of waveforms and indications of factors that may alter the ability to reliably report data. |
| # 5 |
Outcome
Identify and differentiate normal and abnormal waveforms produced during testing. |
| # 7 |
Outcome
Employ effective communication with a range of individuals including the patient and the multidisciplinary team. |