Cargando…
Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships
BACKGROUND: The 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 BODY: In order to study the lack of standardized assessment in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31711428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-019-0286-6 |
_version_ | 1783469169553965056 |
---|---|
author | Jahn, Haiko Kurt Kwan, James O’Reilly, Gerard Geduld, Heike Douglass, Katherine Tenner, Andrea Wallis, Lee Tupesis, Janis Mowafi, Hani O. |
author_facet | Jahn, Haiko Kurt Kwan, James O’Reilly, Gerard Geduld, Heike Douglass, Katherine Tenner, Andrea Wallis, Lee Tupesis, Janis Mowafi, Hani O. |
author_sort | Jahn, Haiko Kurt |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The 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 BODY: In 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. CONCLUSION: There 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6849247 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68492472019-11-15 Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships Jahn, Haiko Kurt Kwan, James O’Reilly, Gerard Geduld, Heike Douglass, Katherine Tenner, Andrea Wallis, Lee Tupesis, Janis Mowafi, Hani O. BMC Emerg Med Debate BACKGROUND: The 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 BODY: In 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. CONCLUSION: There 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. BioMed Central 2019-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6849247/ /pubmed/31711428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-019-0286-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Debate Jahn, Haiko Kurt Kwan, James O’Reilly, Gerard Geduld, Heike Douglass, Katherine Tenner, Andrea Wallis, Lee Tupesis, Janis Mowafi, Hani O. Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title | Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title_full | Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title_fullStr | Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title_full_unstemmed | Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title_short | Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
title_sort | towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31711428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-019-0286-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jahnhaikokurt towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT kwanjames towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT oreillygerard towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT geduldheike towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT douglasskatherine towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT tennerandrea towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT wallislee towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT tupesisjanis towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships AT mowafihanio towardsdevelopingaconsensusassessmentframeworkforglobalemergencymedicinefellowships |