Describing the Evidence Base for Accreditation in Undergraduate Medical Education Internationally: A Scoping Review

Tackett, Sean; Zhang, Christiana Meng; Nassery, Najlla; Caufield-Noll, Christine; Zanten, Marta van

doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002857

Cited by 40 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, this may limit the ability to generalise our conclusions beyond the North American region. However, Tackett et al's 68 recent review of the evidence underpinning international undergraduate medical education accreditation demonstrated the majority of accreditation research evidence originates from high‐income countries, especially in the North American region. This suggests the potential applicability of our findings beyond North America, especially in medical education systems that have adopted competency‐based frameworks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competent to provide compassionate care? A critical discourse analysis of accreditation standards

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Medical school accreditation is recognised internationally as an important quality control process for programmes that lead to the Medical Doctor (MD) degree. Accreditation standards govern the accreditation process which in turn drives educational objectives. Given the power of these standards to shape what becomes valued in the curricula, it is therefore imperative to ensure that core values and ideals of the profession are meaningfully incorporated. As the provision of compassionate care has long been a central medical value, this value should be clearly articulated in MD programme accreditation standards. Methods We conducted a Critical Discourse Analysis of compassionate care within Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) Accreditation Standards governing North American medical schools since 1957. We explored how and to what extent the written language of the accreditation standards incorporated compassionate care. Results References to compassionate care in the UME Accreditation Standards were few and far between. Historically, a statement of ‘The Objectives of Undergraduate Medical Education’ published by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) was referenced for the first and only time in the 1957 standards, describing the development of attributes such as the provision of compassionate care as a basic objective of UME. Thereafter, there was infrequent mention of this value. Terms that could potentially incorporate aspects of compassionate care were identified, yet these were explicated in ways that limited connection to compassion. Instead, the term ‘care’ has increasingly been used instrumentally (ie acute care, chronic care). Conclusion The relative absence of language pertaining to compassionate care in accreditation standards is troubling as compassion is integral to good medical care. This absence is particularly important to attend to in the current era of competency‐based training where we must be explicit about all important curricular objectives lest essential values and practices be unintentionally lost.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competent to provide compassionate care? A critical discourse analysis of accreditation standards

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thirteen reviews (12.9%) cited following the PRISMA, 31 and five (5.0%) the PRISMA-ScR. 13,[32][33][34][35][36] Table 3 summarizes the components of the PRISMA-ScR present in the included scoping reviews. For details by study, see https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12699698.v1.…”

Section: Figure 1: Flow Diagram Of Study Inclusion Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review

Maggio

Larsen

Costello

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to characterize the extent, range, and nature of scoping reviews published in core medical education journals. In so doing, the authors identify areas for improvement in the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews, and highlight opportunities for future research.MethodThe authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1999 through April 2020 in 14 medical education journals. From each review, the authors extracted and summarized key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions, and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. Rationales and research questions were mapped to the reasons for conducting a scoping review, as described by Arksey and O’Malley.ResultsOne hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average 10.1 scoping reviews (MED=4, SD=13.08) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n=42) in 13 of the included 14 journals reviewed. Academic Medicine published the most scoping reviews (n=28) overall. Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews, including to: summarize and disseminate research findings (n=77); examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in a given area (n=74); and to analyze an emerging topic or heterogenous literature base (n=46). In 11 reviews there was alignment between the rationales for the scoping review and the stated research questions. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with only a minority of authors publishing a protocol (n=2) or including stakeholders (n=20). Authors identified several shortcomings of scoping review methodology, including being unable to critically assess the included studies.ConclusionsMedical educators are increasingly conducting scoping reviews with a desire to characterize the literature on a topic. There is room for improvement in the reporting of scoping reviews, including the alignment of research questions, the creation and publishing of protocols, and the inclusion of external stakeholders in published works.

show abstract

“…While limited research currently exists related to the accreditation of basic medical education, studies by FAIMER and others have shown a positive association between accreditation and educational outcomes. 28 A recent analysis of such research articles highlighted three that compared outcomes between accredited and nonaccredited schools in a variety of countries. All three found a positive association between accreditation and examination performance, with students from accredited medical schools performing better on certain standardized exams.…”

Section: Evidence For Accreditationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two of the studies looked at performance on steps of the USMLE, while the other examined scores on a country's national residency entrance exam. 28 Qualitative studies also have shown a positive association between accreditation and the perceived quality of education at medical schools. Participants in a survey to assess the impact of accreditation on Canadian medical schools attested to the increased focus, structure and oversight fostered by accreditation, including the development of formal processes for both economic and security reasons.…”

Section: Evidence For Accreditationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing the Quality of Medical Education Worldwide: ECFMG's 2023 Medical School Accreditation Requirement

Shiffer¹,

Boulet²,

Cover³

et al. 2019

Journal of Medical Regulation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Certification by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG®) is required for international medical graduates (IMGs) to enter U.S. graduate medical education (GME). As a gatekeeper to the U.S. health care system, ECFMG has a duty to verify that these individuals have met minimum standards for undergraduate medical education. Historically, ECFMG has focused on evaluating individual graduates, not medical schools. However, in response to the rapid growth of medical schools around the world and increasing physician migration, ECFMG decided in 2010 to institute medical school accreditation as a future requirement for ECFMG certification. More specifically, beginning in 2023, individuals applying for ECFMG certification will be required to be a student or graduate of a medical school that is accredited by an agency recognized by the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME). By requiring accreditation by an agency that has met WFME's standards, ECFMG seeks to improve the quality, consistency and transparency of undergraduate medical education worldwide. The 2023 Medical School Accreditation Requirement is intended to stimulate global accreditation efforts, increase the information publicly available about medical schools, and provide greater assurance to medical students, regulatory authorities, and the public that these future physicians will be appropriately educated.

show abstract

Describing the Evidence Base for Accreditation in Undergraduate Medical Education Internationally: A Scoping Review

Cited by 40 publications

References 98 publications

Competent to provide compassionate care? A critical discourse analysis of accreditation standards

Competent to provide compassionate care? A critical discourse analysis of accreditation standards

Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review

Advancing the Quality of Medical Education Worldwide: ECFMG's 2023 Medical School Accreditation Requirement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About