Institution
American Board of Internal Medicine
Nonprofit•Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States•
About: American Board of Internal Medicine is a nonprofit organization based out in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Health care & Certification. The organization has 193 authors who have published 439 publications receiving 18793 citations. The organization is also known as: ABIM Foundation.
Topics: Health care, Certification, Maintenance of Certification, Competence (human resources), Graduate medical education
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
McGill University1, University of Groningen2, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences3, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education4, University of New South Wales5, Australian National University6, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada7, McMaster University8, University of Dundee9, American Board of Internal Medicine10, Johns Hopkins University11, University of Toronto12, University of Sheffield13, University of Western Ontario14, University of Ottawa15
TL;DR: The evolution of CBME from the outcomes movement in the 20th century to a renewed approach that, focused on accountability and curricular outcomes and organized around competencies, promotes greater learner-centredness and de-emphasizes time-based curricular design is described.
Abstract: Although competency-based medical education (CBME) has attracted renewed interest in recent years among educators and policy-makers in the health care professions, there is little agreement on many aspects of this paradigm. We convened a unique partnership – the International CBME Collaborators – to examine conceptual issues and current debates in CBME. We engaged in a multi-stage group process and held a consensus conference with the aim of reviewing the scholarly literature of competency-based medical education, identifying controversies in need of clarification, proposing definitions and concepts that could be useful to educators across many jurisdictions, and exploring future directions for this approach to preparing health professionals. In this paper, we describe the evolution of CBME from the outcomes movement in the 20th century to a renewed approach that, focused on accountability and curricular outcomes and organized around competencies, promotes greater learner-centredness and de-emphasizes time-based curricular design. In this paradigm, competence and related terms are redefined to emphasize their multi-dimensional, dynamic, developmental, and contextual nature. CBME therefore has significant implications for the planning of medical curricula and will have an important impact in reshaping the enterprise of medical education. We elaborate on this emerging CBME approach and its related concepts, and invite medical educators everywhere to enter into further dialogue about the promise and the potential perils of competency-based medical curricula for the 21st century.
1,683 citations
••
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center1, SUNY Downstate Medical Center2, American Society of Clinical Oncology3, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center4, Emory University5, Colorado School of Public Health6, Washington University in St. Louis7, Kaiser Permanente8, University of Colorado Denver9, Baylor College of Medicine10, University of California, San Francisco11, University of Washington12, American Board of Internal Medicine13, Yale University14
TL;DR: Low-dose computed tomography screening may benefit individuals at an increased risk for lung cancer, but uncertainty exists about the potential harms of screening and the generalizability of results.
Abstract: Context Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease, resulting in a very low 5-year survival. Screening may reduce the risk of death from lung cancer. Objective To conduct a systematic review of the evidence regarding the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). A multisociety collaborative initiative (involving the American Cancer Society, American College of Chest Physicians, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network) was undertaken to create the foundation for development of an evidence-based clinical guideline. Data Sources MEDLINE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), EMBASE (Ovid: January 1996 to April 2012), and the Cochrane Library (April 2012). Study Selection Of 591 citations identified and reviewed, 8 randomized trials and 13 cohort studies of LDCT screening met criteria for inclusion. Primary outcomes were lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes included nodule detection, invasive procedures, follow-up tests, and smoking cessation. Data Extraction Critical appraisal using predefined criteria was conducted on individual studies and the overall body of evidence. Differences in data extracted by reviewers were adjudicated by consensus. Results Three randomized studies provided evidence on the effect of LDCT screening on lung cancer mortality, of which the National Lung Screening Trial was the most informative, demonstrating that among 53 454 participants enrolled, screening resulted in significantly fewer lung cancer deaths (356 vs 443 deaths; lung cancer−specific mortality, 247 vs 309 events per 100 000 person-years for LDCT and control groups, respectively; relative risk, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93; absolute risk reduction, 0.33%; P = .004). The other 2 smaller studies showed no such benefit. In terms of potential harms of LDCT screening, across all trials and cohorts, approximately 20% of individuals in each round of screening had positive results requiring some degree of follow-up, while approximately 1% had lung cancer. There was marked heterogeneity in this finding and in the frequency of follow-up investigations, biopsies, and percentage of surgical procedures performed in patients with benign lesions. Major complications in those with benign conditions were rare. Conclusion Low-dose computed tomography screening may benefit individuals at an increased risk for lung cancer, but uncertainty exists about the potential harms of screening and the generalizability of results.
1,078 citations
••
TL;DR: Given the importance of assessment and evaluation for CBME, the medical education community will need more collaborative research to address several major challenges in assessment, including “best practices” in the context of systems and institutional culture and how to best to train faculty to be better evaluators.
Abstract: Competency-based medical education (CBME), by definition, necessitates a robust and multifaceted assessment system. Assessment and the judgments or evaluations that arise from it are important at the level of the trainee, the program, and the public. When designing an assessment system for CBME, medical education leaders must attend to the context of the multiple settings where clinical training occurs. CBME further requires assessment processes that are more continuous and frequent, criterion-based, developmental, work-based where possible, use assessment methods and tools that meet minimum requirements for quality, use both quantitative and qualitative measures and methods, and involve the wisdom of group process in making judgments about trainee progress. Like all changes in medical education, CBME is a work in progress. Given the importance of assessment and evaluation for CBME, the medical education community will need more collaborative research to address several major challenges in assessment, including ‘‘best practices’’ in the context of systems and institutional culture and how to best to train faculty to be better evaluators. Finally, we must remember that expertise, not competence, is the ultimate goal. CBME does not end with graduation from a training program, but should represent a career that includes ongoing assessment.
652 citations
••
TL;DR: Three methods for assessment of communication and interpersonal skills are reviewed: checklists of observed behaviors during interactions with real or simulated patients; surveys of patients’ experience in clinical interactions; and examinations using oral, essay, or multiple-choice response questions.
Abstract: Accreditation of residency programs and certification of physicians requires assessment of competence in communication and interpersonal skills. Residency and continuing medical education program directors seek ways to teach and evaluate these competencies. This report summarizes the methods and tools used by educators, evaluators, and researchers in the field of physician-patient communication as determined by the participants in the "Kalamazoo II" conference held in April 2002. Communication and interpersonal skills form an integrated competence with two distinct parts. Communication skills are the performance of specific tasks and behaviors such as obtaining a medical history, explaining a diagnosis and prognosis, giving therapeutic instructions, and counseling. Interpersonal skills are inherently relational and process oriented; they are the effect communication has on another person such as relieving anxiety or establishing a trusting relationship. This report reviews three methods for assessment of communication and interpersonal skills: (1) checklists of observed behaviors during interactions with real or simulated patients; (2) surveys of patients' experience in clinical interactions; and (3) examinations using oral, essay, or multiple-choice response questions. These methods are incorporated into educational programs to assess learning needs, create learning opportunities, or guide feedback for learning. The same assessment tools, when administered in a standardized way, rated by an evaluator other than the teacher, and using a predetermined passing score, become a summative evaluation. The report summarizes the experience of using these methods in a variety of educational and evaluation programs and presents an extensive bibliography of literature on the topic. Professional conversation between patients and doctors shapes diagnosis, initiates therapy, and establishes a caring relationship. The degree to which these activities are successful depends, in large part, on the communication and interpersonal skills of the physician. This report focuses on how the physician's competence in professional conversation with patients might be measured. Valid, reliable, and practical measures can guide professional formation, determine readiness for independent practice, and deepen understanding of the communication itself.
628 citations
••
TL;DR: Trust or lack of trust and a relationship with a pediatrician or another influential person were pivotal for decision-making of new mothers about vaccinating their children.
Abstract: BACKGROUND. The high visibility of controversies regarding vaccination makes it increasingly important to understand how parents decide whether to vaccinate their infants. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this research was to investigate decision-making about vaccinations for infants. DESIGN. We conducted qualitative, open-ended interviews. PARTICIPANTS. Subjects included mothers 1 to 3 days postpartum and again at 3 to 6 months. RESULTS. We addressed 3 topics: attitudes to vaccination, knowledge about vaccination, and decision-making. Mothers who intended to have their infants vaccinated (“vaccinators,” n = 25) either agreed with or did not question vaccination or they accepted vaccination but had significant concerns. Mothers who did not intend to vaccinate (“nonvaccinators,” n = 8) either completely rejected vaccination or they purposely delayed vaccinating/chose only some vaccines. Knowledge about which vaccines are recommended for children was poor among both vaccinators and nonvaccinators. The theme of trust in the medical profession was the central concept that underpinned all of the themes about decision-making. Promoters of vaccination included trusting the pediatrician, feeling satisfied by the pediatrician’s discussion about vaccines, not wanting to diverge from the cultural norm, and wanting to adhere to the social contact. Inhibitors included feeling alienated by or unable to trust the pediatrician, having a trusting relationship with an influential homeopath/naturopath or other person who did not believe in vaccinating, worry about permanent side effects, beliefs that vaccine-preventable diseases are not serious, and feeling that since other children are vaccinated their child is not at risk. CONCLUSION. Trust or lack of trust and a relationship with a pediatrician or another influential person were pivotal for decision-making of new mothers about vaccinating their children. Attempts to work with mothers who are concerned about vaccinating their infants should focus not only on providing facts about vaccines but also on developing trusting and positive relationships.
512 citations
Authors
Showing all 193 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Troyen A. Brennan | 100 | 396 | 43681 |
Christopher J. White | 77 | 621 | 25767 |
Jean Bennett | 72 | 344 | 20983 |
Eric S. Holmboe | 65 | 301 | 15577 |
Amir Qaseem | 63 | 180 | 18032 |
Judy A. Shea | 63 | 365 | 14254 |
George D. Webster | 56 | 248 | 9125 |
John J. Norcini | 53 | 235 | 10363 |
Christine K. Cassel | 52 | 268 | 12199 |
Naomi M. Hamburg | 52 | 195 | 12976 |
Vineet M. Arora | 51 | 378 | 10613 |
Steven E. Weinberger | 40 | 178 | 8856 |
David B. Swanson | 40 | 123 | 5384 |
Shiphra Ginsburg | 36 | 94 | 4090 |
Willis C. Maddrey | 36 | 98 | 8642 |