NAEYC revises accreditation system

Abstract Context In the past decade, two changes have affected the pathology residency match. First, the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) Match, which did not offer pathology residency, became accredited under a single graduate medical education (GME) system with the Main Residency Match (MRM), which offers pathology residency. Second, substantially fewer United States senior-year allopathic medical students (US MD seniors) matched into pathology residency. Objective To determine whether there were major changes in the number and percentage of osteopathic students and physicians (DOs) matching into pathology residency programs over the past decade. Methods Pathology match outcomes for DOs from 2011 to 2020 were obtained by reviewing AOA Match data from the National Matching Services and MRM data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP). The number of DOs that filled pathology positions in the MRM was divided by the total number of pathology positions filled in the MRM to calculate the percentage of pathology positions taken by DOs. Results Over the past decade, there was a 109% increase in the total number of DOs matching into pathology residency (34 in 2011 vs. 71 in 2020). During this time, there was a 23.3% increase in the total number of pathology positions filled in the MRM (476 in 2011 vs. 587 in 2020). Thus, the percentage of pathology residency positions filled by DOs increased from 7.1% in 2011 to 12.1% in 2020. The substantial increase of DOs in pathology occurred simultaneously with a 94.2% increase in the total number of DOs filling AOA/MRM “postgraduate year 1” (PGY-1) positions (3201 in 2011 vs. 6215 in 2020). Thus, the percentage of DOs choosing pathology residency has remained steady (1.06% in 2011 and 1.14% in 2020). In 2020, pathology had the third lowest percentage of filled PGY-1 residency positions taken by DOs, out of 15 major medical specialties. Conclusion The proportion of DOs choosing pathology residency was stable from 2011 to 2020 despite the move to a single GME accreditation system and the stark decline in US MD seniors choosing pathology. In 2020, a slightly higher percentage of DOs (1.14%) chose pathology residency than US MD seniors (1.13%). Overall, DOs more often choose other medical specialties, including primary care. Additional studies are needed to determine why fewer US MD seniors, but not fewer DOs, are choosing pathology residency.

Download Full-text

A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Endoscopy Competence Among Gastroenterology Trainees in the Era of the Next Accreditation System

Academic Medicine ◽

10.1097/acm.0000000000002885 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 95 (2) ◽

pp. 283-292 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Samuel Han ◽

Joshua C. Obuch ◽

Anna M. Duloy ◽

Rajesh N. Keswani ◽

Matt Hall ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multicenter Study ◽

Accreditation System ◽

Prospective Multicenter Study ◽

Next Accreditation System

Download Full-text

Day-Care Standards: Need and Impact

PEDIATRICS ◽

10.1542/peds.91.1.234 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 91 (1) ◽

pp. 234-236

Author(s):

Sue Bredekamp

Keyword(s):

Health And Safety ◽

Point Of View ◽

Professional Organization ◽

Accreditation System ◽

Safety Standards ◽

System 2 ◽

Quality Programs ◽

Eligibility Requirements ◽

The Impact ◽

Licensing Standards

Any discussion of standards, no matter how brief, must first acknowledge that there are different types of standards established for different purposes. As the director of the national voluntary accreditation system for child care centers and schools established by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), I am most familiar with the need and impact of accreditation standards, which are, by definition, standards for distinguishing high-quality programs established by a professional organization. In any case the implementation of a national accreditation system is heavily influenced by local and state licensing standards, which are mandatory government regulations that establish a baseline of protection. Accreditation and licensing standards are both influenced by model standards such as the health and safety standards of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Public Health Association.1 These standards establish a model, based on the best professional evidence, that serves as a reference for the other two systems but does not carry an enforcement system of its own. This paper will discuss the need for and impact of all three types of standards from the point of view of my experience in operating NAEYC's accreditation system.2 Because our accreditation process is nationally administered, we have the opportunity to observe the impact of diverse licensing standards on quality. In order to maintain accessibility we have relatively few eligibility requirements, and because we do not require 100% compliance with our criteria, we also have the opportunity to observe the interrelationships among standards and other effects. One caveat must be offered at the outset.

Download Full-text