Residency "Dashboard": Family Medicine GME's Step Towards Transparency and Accountability?

Abstract

could consistently occur simultaneously with efforts to support the core content requirements of the family medicine clerkship, exportable teaching models for use in dispersed clinical settings may emerge. The differences in the number of FTE's devoted to support medical student education varied greatly in the ADFM Quick Hitter Survey with the differences appearing not attributable to class size. The survey reveals responses concerning a variety of tracts for medical student learning to include rural, urban, and underserved, global/international health, research, and community/integrative health. Although these tracts may have unique importance for individual departments, the implication of these activities on the ability to deliver required family medicine teaching experiences consistent with national norms is unknown. Departments must carefully balance their practice transformational activities with the dynamic changes that come with evolving standardization of required family medicine teaching experiences occurring mostly in stand-alone family medicine clerkships as well as department-specifi c elective and selective activities.

A Design Protocol to Develop Radiology Dashboards

“…Determining KPIs and benchmark standards: Selecting the type of indicators which should be included in dashboards is important. Depending on its situation, each department needs to measure the indicators related to its own area of performance, not all the indicators ( 9 , 26 ), in other words, indicators which are critical and special to the quality of their performance ( 27 ). Each indicator is selected according to business purpose and the ability to be gathered easily through standard business functions ( 28 ) and besides accurate measurement of the indicator ( 9 ), we should identify dashboards metrics from regulatory standards which we need for accreditation or credentials ( 29 ).…”

Six Years’ Experience Using Specialty National Residency Index: An Early Dashboard to Document Change Over Time

“…By giving programs aspirational targets for metrics around several accreditation domains, the RPI sought to spur the greater family medicine residency community to strive to exceed minimum standards. 11,12 Our analysis of the 82 programs with 3 or more years of RPI data revealed that the tool did not result in significant changes for most metrics. Although approximately 40% of the 82 programs with longitudinal data available for analysis consistently achieved aspirational (green) targets for most of the metrics, there were not significant improvements in the percentage of programs achieving those targets over time.…”

“…The AFMRD Board of Directors proposed the development of a dashboard-style tool, called the residency performance index (RPI), to help programs in the process of selfimprovement. 11,12 We have previously described the process to develop this tool and its initial successes and challenges. 13,14 In 2018, the AFMRD Board made the decision to sunset the RPI due to insufficient return on investment as demonstrated by increasing software costs and staff time coupled with lack of growth in participation and only modest improvement in quality.…”

From Information Management to Information Visualization

“…Selecting the type of indicators which should be included in dashboard is important. Depending on its situation, each department needs to measure the indicators related to its own area of performance, not all the indicators [41,48], but indicators which are critical and special to the quality of their performance [49]. Each indicator is selected according to the business purpose and the ability to be gathered easily through standard business functions [50].…”