Sunil Sabharwal1,2, Anthony E Chiodo3, Mikaela M Raddatz4. 1. Harvard Medical School , Boston , Massachusetts , USA. 2. VA Boston Health Care System , Boston , Massachusetts , USA. 3. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan , Ann Arbour , Michigan , USA. 4. American Board of Physical Medicine &Rehabilitation , Rochester , Minnesota , USA.
Abstract
Context/Objective: The examination for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Medicine subspecialty certification has been administered since 1998, but published information about exam performance or administration is limited. Design: Retrospective review Setting/Participants: We examined de-identified information from the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) database for characteristics and performance of candidates (n = 566) who completed the SCI Medicine Examination over a 10-year period (2005-2014), during which the exam outline and passing standard remained consistent. Interventions: Not applicable Outcome Measures: We analysed candidate performance by candidate track, primary specialty, number of attempts, and domains being tested. We also examined candidate perception of the SCI Medicine Exam by analysing responses to a survey taken after exam completion. Results: Thirty-six percent of candidates who completed the exam during the study period took it for initial certification (23% in the fellowship track and 13% in the practice track offered during the initial "grandfathering" period) and 64% took it for maintenance of certification (MOC) in SCI Medicine. Factors associated with better exam performance included primary specialty certification in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) and first attempt at passing the exam. For PM&R candidates, ABPMR Part I Examination scores and SCI Medicine Examination scores were strongly correlated. Candidate feedback about the exam was largely positive with 97% agreeing or strongly agreeing that it was relevant to the field and 90% that it was a good test of their knowledge. Conclusion: This study can inform prospective candidates for the SCI Medicine Examination as well as those guiding them. It may also provide useful information for future exam development.
Context/Objective: The examination for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Medicine subspecialty certification has been administered since 1998, but published information about exam performance or administration is limited. Design: Retrospective review Setting/Participants: We examined de-identified information from the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) database for characteristics and performance of candidates (n = 566) who completed the SCI Medicine Examination over a 10-year period (2005-2014), during which the exam outline and passing standard remained consistent. Interventions: Not applicable Outcome Measures: We analysed candidate performance by candidate track, primary specialty, number of attempts, and domains being tested. We also examined candidate perception of the SCI Medicine Exam by analysing responses to a survey taken after exam completion. Results: Thirty-six percent of candidates who completed the exam during the study period took it for initial certification (23% in the fellowship track and 13% in the practice track offered during the initial "grandfathering" period) and 64% took it for maintenance of certification (MOC) in SCI Medicine. Factors associated with better exam performance included primary specialty certification in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) and first attempt at passing the exam. For PM&R candidates, ABPMR Part I Examination scores and SCI Medicine Examination scores were strongly correlated. Candidate feedback about the exam was largely positive with 97% agreeing or strongly agreeing that it was relevant to the field and 90% that it was a good test of their knowledge. Conclusion: This study can inform prospective candidates for the SCI Medicine Examination as well as those guiding them. It may also provide useful information for future exam development.
Entities:
Keywords:
Spinal cord injury medicine, Board certification, Examination, subspecialty, American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Authors: Stuart F Quan; Richard B Berry; Daniel Buysse; Nancy A Collop; Madeleine Grigg-Damberger; Susan M Harding; Conrad Iber; W Vaughn McCall; Michael J Sateia; Stephen H Sheldon; Michael H Silber; Adam Sorscher; Sally L Davidson Ward; Sigrid Veasey; B Tucker Woodson; Brian Hess; Roberta Kangilaski Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Lawrence R Robinson; Sunil Sabharwal; Sherilyn Driscoll; Mikaela Raddatz; Anthony E Chiodo Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Lawrence R Robinson; Sherilyn Driscoll; Sunil Sabharwal; Mikaela Raddatz; Anthony E Chiodo Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 2.159