Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships

Abstract

BackgroundThe number of Global Emergency Medicine (GEM) Fellowship training programs are increasing worldwide. Despite the increasing number of GEM fellowships, there is not an agreed upon approach for assessment of GEM trainees.Main bodyIn order to study the lack of standardized assessment in GEM fellowship training, a working group was established between the International EM Fellowship Consortium (IEMFC) and the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM). A needs assessment survey of IEMFC members and a review were undertaken to identify assessment tools currently in use by GEM fellowship programs; what relevant frameworks exist; and common elements used by programs with a wide diversity of emphases. A consensus framework was developed through iterative working group discussions. Thirty-two of 40 GEM fellowships responded (80% response). There is variability in the use and format of formal assessment between programs. Thirty programs reported training GEM fellows in the last 3 years (94%). Eighteen (56%) reported only informal assessments of trainees. Twenty-seven (84%) reported regular meetings for assessment of trainees. Eleven (34%) reported use of a structured assessment of any sort for GEM fellows and, of these, only 2 (18%) used validated instruments modified from general EM residency assessment tools. Only 3 (27%) programs reported incorporation of formal written feedback from partners in other countries. Using these results along with a review of the available assessment tools in GEM the working group developed a set of principles to guide GEM fellowship assessments along with a sample assessment for use by GEM fellowship programs seeking to create their own customized assessments.ConclusionThere are currently no widely used assessment frameworks for GEM fellowship training. The working group made recommendations for developing standardized assessments aligned with competencies defined by the programs, that characterize goals and objectives of training, and document progress of trainees towards achieving those goals. Frameworks used should include perspectives of multiple stakeholders including partners in other countries where trainees conduct field work. Future work may evaluate the usability, validity and reliability of assessment frameworks in GEM fellowship training.

Global Emergency Medicine Fellowships: Survey of Curricula and Pre-Fellowship Experiences

“…They found inconsistent methods of assessing fellows and created a consensus framework for a more standardized and outcome-oriented evaluation process. 12 While flexibility in curricula is important, more work is required to identify differences in curricula, the value of each course and experience to best identify whether a common denominator of curricula should exist across all GEM fellowships.…”

Authorship representation in global emergency medicine: a bibliometric analysis from 2016 to 2020

“…[9][10][11] Global emergency medicine (GEM) is a relatively new, and rapidly growing, subspecialty bridging the fields of global health and emergency medicine (EM), which focuses on improving the science and practice of emergency care (EC) globally. [12][13][14] It encompasses a wide breadth of topics including the development of the EM specialty and EC systems in areas where such systems do not exist as well as clinical care during humanitarian emergencies. 12 14 Despite the burden of conditions that fall within the scope of EM disproportionately affecting LMIC populations (eg, traumatic injuries, acute presentations of communicable and non-communicable diseases as well as presentations of a variety of other illnesses), global EM development has until recently, largely been led by academics from HICs where EM was originally pioneered.…”

Building a virtual community of practice for medical students: The Global Emergency Medicine Student Leadership Program

“…To date, there are few defined competencies and assessment tools to gauge the effectiveness of GEM learning experiences. 19 , 20 …”