Defining Scholarly Activity in Graduate Medical Education

Abstract

Background Scholarly activity is a requirement for accreditation by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. There is currently no uniform definition used by all Residency Review Committees (RRCs). A total of 6 of the 27 RRCs currently have a rubric or draft of a rubric to evaluate scholarly activity. Objective To develop a definition of scholarly activity and a set of rubrics to be used in program accreditation to reduce subjectivity of the evaluation of scholarly activity at the level of individual residency programs and across RRCs. Methods We performed a review of the pertinent literature and selected faculty promotion criteria across the United States to develop a structure for a proposed rubric of scholarly activity, drawing on work on scholarship by experts to create a definition of scholarly activity and rubrics for its assessment. Results The literature review showed that academic institutions in the United States place emphasis on all 4 major components of Boyer's definition of scholarship: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. We feel that the assessment of scholarly activity should mirror these findings as set forth in our proposed rubric. Our proposed rubric is intended to ensure a more objective evaluation of these components of scholarship in accreditation reviews, and to address both expectations for scholarly pursuits for core teaching faculty and those for resident and fellow physicians. Conclusion The aim of our proposed rubric is to ensure a more objective evaluation of these components of scholarship in accreditation reviews, and to address expectations for scholarly pursuits for core teaching faculty as well as those for resident and fellow physicians.

The Diverse Surgeons' Initiative: Longitudinal Assessment of a Successful National Program

“…42 Contributions to the peer-reviewed literature as a means of revealing evidence of scholarly activity has been a renewed emphasis of the ACGME Residency Review Committees. 43 These publications are intended to enhance the field, but also are critical to the advancement of physicians with academic pursuits. 44 To date, there is no reliable evidence of how many peer-reviewed publications the typical general surgery trainee or those recently out of training produce.…”

Limits to Scholarship: How Can We Enhance the Program Director’s Role?

“…As noted by Johnston et al [2], the ACGME itself contributes to the focus on PubMed publications as evidence of scholarly activity for program directors and key faculty by requiring input of PubMed activity annually into the New Accreditation System (NAS): such input enhances transparency but emphasizes this form of scholarship [3,8]. By focusing on publications as found in a PubMed search, however, promotion committees overlook other potentially significant demonstrations of scholarship [9]. Non-standard forms of scholarship, as defined by teaching, medical research, and even e-learning, could serve as satisfactory alternatives to traditional peer-reviewed publications.…”

A National Evaluation of the Scholarly Activity Requirement in Residency Programs: A Survey of Emergency Medicine Program Directors

“…5 This expanded definition of scholarly activity may be derived from increased acceptance of Boyer's definition of scholarship which goes beyond traditional discovery (original research) to include integration, application, and teaching of research findings. 6 A frequent source of RC citations for program deficiency, the ACGME scholarly project requirement continues to vary widely across medical specialties without consistent definitions or rubrics for evaluation. 6 Few individual specialties have examined and published their investigations into how best to evaluate individual program scholarly activity.…”

“…6 A frequent source of RC citations for program deficiency, the ACGME scholarly project requirement continues to vary widely across medical specialties without consistent definitions or rubrics for evaluation. 6 Few individual specialties have examined and published their investigations into how best to evaluate individual program scholarly activity. General surgery, with over 250 ACGME-accredited residency programs, has conducted this process and subsequently created clear requirements for faculty involvement and resident participation and productivity.…”