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.

BACKGROUND. The logistic regression model is being used with increasing frequency in all areas of public health research. In the calendar year 1989, over 30% of the articles published in the American Journal of Public Health employed some form of logistic regression modeling. In spite of this increase, there has been no commensurate increase in the use of commonly available methods for assessing model adequacy. METHODS. We review the current status of the use of logistic regression modeling in the American Journal of Public Health. We present a brief overview of currently available and easily used methods for assessing the adequacy of a fitted logistic regression model. RESULTS. An example is used to demonstrate the methods as well as a few of the adverse consequences of failing to assess the fit of the model. One important adverse consequence illustrated in the example is the inclusion of variables in the model as a result of the influence of one subject. CONCLUSIONS. Failure to address model adequacy may lead to misleading or incorrect inferences. Recommendations are made for the use of methods for assessing model adequacy and for future editorial policy in regard to the review of articles using logistic regression.

Background Inspection systems are used in health care to promote quality improvements, i.e. to achieve changes in organisational structures or processes, healthcare provider behaviour and patient outcomes. These systems are based on the assumption that externally promoted adherence to evidence-based standards (through inspection/assessment) will result in higher quality of health care. However, the benefits of external inspection in terms of organisational, provider and patient level outcomes are not clear. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of external inspection of compliance with standards in improving healthcare organisation behaviour, healthcare professional behaviour and patient outcomes. Search methods We searched the following electronic databases for studies: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Scopus, HMIC, Index to Theses and Intute from their inception dates up to May 2011. There was no language restriction and studies were included regardless of publication status. We searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted authors of relevant papers, accreditation bodies and the International Organization for Standardisation (ISO), regarding any further published or unpublished work. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time-series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) evaluating the effect of external inspection against external standards on healthcare organisation change, healthcare professional behaviour or patient outcomes in hospitals, primary healthcare organisations and other community-based healthcare organisations. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently applied eligibility criteria, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included study. Since meta-analysis was not possible, we produced a narrative results summary. Main results We identified one cluster-RCT involving 20 South African public hospitals (Salmon 2003) and one ITS involving all acute trusts in England (OPM 2009) for inclusion in this review. Salmon and colleagues (Salmon 2003) showed mixed effects of a hospital accreditation system on the compliance with COHSASA (the Council for Health Services Accreditation for South Africa) accreditation standards and eight indicators of hospital quality. Significantly improved total mean compliance score with COHSASA accreditation standards was found for 21/28 service elements: mean intervention effect (95% confidence interval (CI)) was 30% (23% to 57%) (P < 0.001). The score increased from 48% to 78% in intervention hospitals, while remaining the same in control hospitals (43%). A sub-analysis of 424 a priori identified critical criteria (19 service elements) showed significantly improved compliance with the critical standards (P < 0.001). The score increased from 41% (21% to 46%) to 75% (55% to 96%) ...

Background Accreditation is considered an essential ingredient for an effective system of health professions education (HPE) globally. While accreditation systems exist in various forms worldwide, there has been little written about the contemporary enterprise of accreditation and even less about its role in improving health care outcomes. We set out to 1) identify a global, contemporary definition of accreditation in the health professions, 2) describe the relationship of educational accreditation to health care outcomes, 3) identify important questions and recurring issues in twenty-first century HPE accreditation, and 4) propose a framework of essential ingredients in present-day HPE accreditation. Methods We identified health professions accreditation leaders via a literature search and a Google search of HPE institutions, as well as by accessing the networks of other leaders. These leaders were invited to join an international consensus consortium to advance the scholarship and thinking about HPE accreditation. We describe the consensus findings from the International Health Professions Accreditation Outcomes Consortium (IHPAOC). Results We define accreditation as the process of formal evaluation of an educational program, institution, or system against defined standards by an external body for the purposes of quality assurance and enhancement. In the context of HPE, accreditation is distinct from other forms of program evaluation or research. Accreditation can enhance health care outcomes because of its ability to influence and standardize the quality of training programs, continuously enhance curriculum to align with population needs, and improve learning environments. We describe ten fundamental and recurring elements of accreditation systems commonly found in HPE and provide an overview of five emerging developments in accreditation in the health professions based on the consensus findings. Conclusions Accreditation has taken on greater importance in contemporary HPE. These consensus findings provide frameworks of core elements of accreditation systems and both recurring and emerging design issues. HPE scholars, educators, and leaders can build on these frameworks to advance research, development, and operation of high-quality accreditation systems worldwide.

At their 2009 consensus conference, the International CBME Collaborators proposed a number of central tenets of CBME in order to advance the field of medical education. Although the proposed conceptualization of CBME offers several advantages and opportunities, including a greater emphasis on outcomes, a mechanism for the promotion of learner-centred curricula, and the potential to move away from time-based training and credentialing in medicine, it is also associated with several significant barriers to adoption. This paper examines the concepts of CBME through a broad educational policy lens, identifying considerations for medical education leaders, health care institutions, and policy-makers at both the meso (program, institutional) and macro (health care system, inter-jurisdictional, and international) levels. Through this analysis, it is clear that CBME is associated with a number of complex challenges and questions, and cannot be considered in isolation from the complex systems in which it functions. Much more work is needed to engage stakeholders in dialogue, to debate the issues, and to identify possible solutions.