BACKGROUND: In 1999, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Outcome Project began to focus on resident performance in the 6 competencies of patient care, medical knowledge, professionalism, practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal communication skills, and professionalism. Beginning in 2007, the ACGME began collecting information on how programs assess these competencies. This report provides information on the nature and extent of those assessments. METHODS: Using data collected by the ACGME for site visits, we use descriptive statistics and percentages to describe the number and type of methods and assessors accredited programs (n = 4417) report using to assess the competencies. Observed differences among specialties, methodologies, and assessors are tested with analysis of variance procedures. RESULTS: Almost all (>97%) of programs report assessing all of the competencies and using multiple methods and multiple assessors. Similar assessment methods and evaluator types were consistently used across the 6 competencies. However, there were some differences in the use of patient and family as assessors: Primary care and ambulatory specialties used these to a greater extent than other specialties. CONCLUSION: Residency programs are emphasizing the competencies in their evaluation of residents. Understanding the scope of evaluation methodologies that programs use in resident assessment is important for both the profession and the public, so that together we may monitor continuing improvement in US graduate medical education.
BACKGROUND: In 1999, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Outcome Project began to focus on resident performance in the 6 competencies of patient care, medical knowledge, professionalism, practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal communication skills, and professionalism. Beginning in 2007, the ACGME began collecting information on how programs assess these competencies. This report provides information on the nature and extent of those assessments. METHODS: Using data collected by the ACGME for site visits, we use descriptive statistics and percentages to describe the number and type of methods and assessors accredited programs (n = 4417) report using to assess the competencies. Observed differences among specialties, methodologies, and assessors are tested with analysis of variance procedures. RESULTS: Almost all (>97%) of programs report assessing all of the competencies and using multiple methods and multiple assessors. Similar assessment methods and evaluator types were consistently used across the 6 competencies. However, there were some differences in the use of patient and family as assessors: Primary care and ambulatory specialties used these to a greater extent than other specialties. CONCLUSION: Residency programs are emphasizing the competencies in their evaluation of residents. Understanding the scope of evaluation methodologies that programs use in resident assessment is important for both the profession and the public, so that together we may monitor continuing improvement in US graduate medical education.
Authors: Ranjit Singh; Bruce Naughton; John S Taylor; Marlon R Koenigsberg; Diana R Anderson; Linda L McCausland; Robert G Wahler; Amanda Robinson; Gurdev Singh Journal: Med Educ Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 6.251
Authors: Mohammad U Malik; David A Diaz Voss Varela; Charles M Stewart; Kulsoom Laeeq; Gayane Yenokyan; Howard W Francis; Nasir I Bhatti Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2012-12
Authors: Natasha Chida; Christopher Brown; Jyoti Mathad; Kelly Carpenter; George Nelson; Marcos C Schechter; Paulina A Rebolledo; Valeria Fabre; Diana Silva Cantillo; Sarah Longworth; Valerianna Amorosa; Christian Petrauskis; Catherine Boulanger; Natalie Cain; Amita Gupta; Jane McKenzie-White; Robert Bollinger; Michael Melia Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2018-06