Literature DB >> 15383345

Revisiting the idea of a national center for health professions education research.

Steven A Wartman1.   

Abstract

The need for a national center for health professions education research is more compelling today than when originally proposed 15 years ago. There is a general consensus as to the need for better assessment of the educational outcomes of U.S. health professions schools, especially in light of the large investment society makes in the health education infrastructure. The author reviews briefly the current state of research in medical education as an example of health professions education research, from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives, and uses the emergence of the teaching academy movement as an example of how innovation in medical education is often implemented (i.e., the "cottage industry approach"). The substantial obstacles facing medical education research are discussed, including significant conceptual, curricular, financial, and outcomes-related challenges. The author proposes the creation and organization of a national center for health professions education research, consisting of four research divisions: basic, translational, applied, and systems. The funding for the center would be derived from a research and development assessment on existing federal investments in health education. The hurdles to the creation of such a center are reviewed and include intellectual, financial/political, and regulatory ones. The author suggests that a national center for health professions education research can be an effective mechanism for the study of many complex issues in health education and health care delivery for which the public desires accountability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15383345     DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200410000-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  6 in total

1.  Expertise, Time, Money, Mentoring, and Reward: Systemic Barriers That Limit Education Researcher Productivity-Proceedings From the AAMC GEA Workshop.

Authors:  Lalena M Yarris; Amy Miller Juve; Anthony R Artino; Gail M Sullivan; Steven Rougas; Barbara Joyce; Kevin Eva
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2014-09

2.  Reforming internal medicine residency training. A report from the Society of General Internal Medicine's task force for residency reform.

Authors:  Eric S Holmboe; Judith L Bowen; Michael Green; Jessica Gregg; Lorenzo DiFrancesco; Eileen Reynolds; Patrick Alguire; David Battinelli; Catherine Lucey; Daniel Duffy
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Trends in study methods used in undergraduate medical education research, 1969-2007.

Authors:  Amy Baernstein; Hillary K Liss; Patricia A Carney; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-09-05       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Creating enduring change: demonstrating the long-term impact of a faculty development program in palliative care.

Authors:  Amy M Sullivan; Matthew D Lakoma; J Andrew Billings; Antoinette S Peters; Susan D Block
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  For the General Internist: A Summary of Key Innovations in Medical Education.

Authors:  Brita Roy; Shobhina G Chheda; Carol Bates; Kathel Dunn; Reena Karani; Lisa L Willett
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  Characteristics of multi-institutional health sciences education research: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jocelyn Huang Schiller; Gary L Beck Dallaghan; Terry Kind; Heather McLauchlan; Joseph Gigante; Sherilyn Smith
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2017-10-01
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.