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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jahn, Haiko Kurt, Kwan, James, O’Reilly, Gerard, Geduld, Heike, Douglass, Katherine, Tenner, Andrea, Wallis, Lee, Tupesis, Janis, Mowafi, Hani O.
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