Commentary: Building the Evidence Base in Support of the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification Program

2011 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard E. Hawkins ◽  
Kevin B. Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Base ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification

scholarly journals The American Board of Pathology's Maintenance of Certification Program Update

2014 ◽  
Vol 138 (4) ◽  
pp. 512-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Active Participation ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Voluntary Participation ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
The Public ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification

Context.—The American Board of Pathology (ABP) began issuing time-limited certificates in 2006. New diplomates of the ABP are required to participate in the ABP's Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program to maintain certification. Voluntary participation in the MOC program is also available to diplomates with non–time-limited certificates. Objective.—To update the pathology community on the requirements of the ABP's MOC program and some current MOC policies and to demonstrate the value of MOC participation for both time-limited and non–time-limited certificate holders. Data Sources.—This review uses ABP-archived minutes of the MOC Committee, the ABP MOC Booklet of Information, the ABP Pathway system reports, and the collective experiences of the ABP trustees and staff. Conclusions.—The ABP's MOC program has active participation by almost 5000 diplomates of the ABP. The ABP, in conjunction with the American Board of Medical Specialties, continually strives to enhance the relevance and value of MOC to our diplomates and to the public.

scholarly journals The American Board of Pathology's 2020 Continuing Certification Program

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Board Of Trustees ◽  
Board Certification ◽  
Educational Standards ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
The Public ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification ◽  
History Of

Context.— Certification by the American Board of Pathology (ABPath) is a valued credential that serves patients, families, and the public and improves patient care. The ABPath establishes professional and educational standards and assesses the knowledge of candidates for initial certification in pathology. Diplomates certified in 2006 and thereafter are required to participate in Continuing Certification (CC; formerly Maintenance of Certification) in order to maintain certification. Objective.— To inform and update the pathology community on the history of board certification, the requirements for CC, ABPath CertLink, changes to the CC program, and ABPath compliance with recommendations from the American Board of Medical Specialties Vision Commission; to demonstrate the value of CC participation for diplomates with non–time-limited certification. Data Sources.— This review uses ABPath archived minutes of the CC Committee and the Board of Trustees, the ABPath CC Booklet of Information, the collective knowledge of the ABPath staff and trustees, and the American Board of Medical Specialties 2018–2019 Board Certification Report. Conclusions.— The ABPath continues to update the CC program to make it more relevant and meaningful and less burdensome for diplomates. Adding ABPath CertLink to the program has been a significant enhancement for the assessment of medical knowledge and has been well received by diplomates.

Responsibilities and Interests of Pediatricians Practicing Hospital Medicine in the United States

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoAnna K Leyenaar ◽  
Wade Harrison ◽  
Jessica J Truelove ◽  
Samantha House ◽  
Gary L Freed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Hospital Medicine ◽  
The United States ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification ◽  
Survey Response Rate ◽  
Pediatric Subspecialty ◽  
Ongoing Monitoring

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In 2016, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) approved pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) as the newest pediatric subspecialty. To characterize development of the field, this article aims to: (1) describe the responsibilities and practice settings of US pediatricians self-identifying as hospitalists; and (2) determine how exclusive PHM practice, compared with PHM practice in combination with general or subspecialty care, was associated with professional development interests. METHODS: Pediatricians enrolling in the 2017-2018 American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) Maintenance of Certification program were offered a voluntary survey about their responsibilities, interests, and practice settings. Logistic regression was employed to characterize associations between exclusive PHM practice and: (1) interest in quality improvement (QI) leadership; (2) intention to take the PHM certifying exam; (3) satisfaction with allocation of professional time; and (4) intention to maintain more than one ABP certification. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 70.0%; 1662 (13.1%) self-reported PHM practice. Four hundred ninety-one (29.5%) practiced PHM exclusively, 518 (31.1%) practiced PHM and general pediatrics, and 653 (39.3%) practiced PHM and one or more subspecialties. Respondents reporting exclusive PHM practice were significantly more likely to report interest in QI leadership or consultation (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.79), PHM exam certification (adjusted OR, 7.10; 95% CI, 5.45-9.25), and maintenance of more than one ABP certification (adjusted OR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.89-3.68). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalists reported diverse clinical and nonclinical responsibilities. Those practicing PHM exclusively expressed high levels of interest in board certification and QI leadership. Ongoing monitoring of PHM responsibilities and practice settings will be important to support the professional development of the PHM workforce.

Cost Analysis of the American Board of Internal Medicine's Maintenance-of-Certification Program

2016 ◽  
Vol 164 (8) ◽  
pp. 571
Author(s):  
Alexander T. Sandhu ◽  
R. Adams Dudley ◽  
Dhruv S. Kazi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Analysis ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification

The Changing Landscape of Maintenance of Certification: History, Value and Evidence Base, and Future Impact on Forensic Pathology

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 571-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura D. Knight ◽  
Nicholas I. Batalis ◽  
Cassie L. Boggs ◽  
Amy Martin ◽  
Maneesha Pandey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Pathology ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification

Association between Performance in a Maintenance of Certification Program and Disciplinary Actions against the Medical Licenses of Anesthesiologists

2018 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 812-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Zhou ◽  
Huaping Sun ◽  
Alex Macario ◽  
Mark T. Keegan ◽  
Andrew J. Patterson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
Lower Incidence ◽  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Certification Program ◽  
Disciplinary Actions ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification ◽  
Lower Likelihood ◽  
Significant Change ◽  
Certification Requirements

Abstract Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New Background In 2000, the American Board of Anesthesiology (Raleigh, North Carolina) began issuing time-limited certificates requiring renewal every 10 yr through a maintenance of certification program. This study investigated the association between performance in this program and disciplinary actions against medical licenses. Methods The incidence of postcertification prejudicial license actions was compared (1) between anesthesiologists certified between 1994 and 1999 (non–time-limited certificates not requiring maintenance of certification) and those certified between 2000 and 2005 (time-limited certificates requiring maintenance of certification); (2) within the non–time-limited cohort, between those who did and did not voluntarily participate in maintenance of certification; and (3) within the time-limited cohort, between those who did and did not complete maintenance of certification requirements within 10 yr. Results The cumulative incidence of license actions was 3.8% (587 of 15,486). The incidence did not significantly differ after time-limited certificates were introduced (hazard ratio = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.39; for non–time-limited cohort compared with time-limited cohort). In the non–time-limited cohort, 10% (n = 953) voluntarily participated in maintenance of certification. Maintenance of certification participation was associated with a lower incidence of license actions (hazard ratio = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.94). In the time-limited cohort, 90% (n = 5,329) completed maintenance of certification requirements within 10 yr of certificate issuance. Not completing maintenance of certification requirements (n = 588) was associated with a higher incidence of license actions (hazard ratio = 4.61; 95% CI, 3.27 to 6.51). Conclusions These findings suggest that meeting maintenance of certification requirements is associated with a lower likelihood of being disciplined by a state licensing agency. The introduction of time-limited certificates in 2000 was not associated with a significant change in the rate of license actions.

Diagnostic Radiologists' Participation in the American Board of Radiology Maintenance of Certification Program

2019 ◽  
Vol 213 (6) ◽  
pp. 1284-1290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Rosenkrantz ◽  
Lincoln L. Berland ◽  
Darel E. Heitkamp ◽  
Richard Duszak
Keyword(s):  
Certification Program ◽  
Maintenance Of Certification
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document