scholarly journals The Single Graduate Medical Education (GME) Accreditation System Will Change the Future of the Family Medicine Workforce

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 838-842 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Peabody ◽  
Thomas R. O’Neill ◽  
Aimee R. Eden ◽  
James C. Puffer
2018 ◽  
Vol 93 (7) ◽  
pp. 1002-1013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly J. Caverzagie ◽  
Susan W. Lane ◽  
Niraj Sharma ◽  
John Donnelly ◽  
Jeffrey R. Jaeger ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 115 (4) ◽  
pp. 251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boyd R. Buser ◽  
James Swartwout ◽  
Cheryl Gross ◽  
Maura Biszewski

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Awad A. Ahmed ◽  
Wei-Ting Hwang ◽  
Charles R. Thomas ◽  
Curtiland Deville

ABSTRACT Background  Data show that international medical graduates (IMGs), both US and foreign born, are more likely to enter primary care specialties and practice in underserved areas. Comprehensive assessments of representation trends for IMGs in the US physician workforce are limited. Objective  We reported current and historical representation trends for IMGs in the graduate medical education (GME) training pool and US practicing physician workforce. Methods  We compared representation for the total GME and active practicing physician pools with the 20 largest residency specialties. A 2-sided test was used for comparison, with P < .001 considered significant. To assess significant increases in IMG GME trainee representation for the total pool and each of the specialties from 1990–2015, the slope was estimated using simple linear regression. Results  IMGs showed significantly greater representation among active practicing physicians in 4 specialties: internal medicine (39%), neurology (31%), psychiatry (30%), and pediatrics (25%). IMGs in GME showed significantly greater representation in 5 specialties: pathology (39%), internal medicine (39%), neurology (36%), family medicine (32%), and psychiatry (31%; all P < .001). Over the past quarter century, IMG representation in GME has increased by 0.2% per year in the total GME pool, and 1.1% per year for family medicine, 0.5% for obstetrics and gynecology and general surgery, and 0.3% for internal medicine. Conclusions  IMGs make up nearly a quarter of the total GME pool and practicing physician workforce, with a disproportionate share, and larger increases over our study period in certain specialties.


2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 40-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph J. Stella ◽  
Donna L. Lamb ◽  
Steven C. Stain ◽  
Paula M. Termuhlen

Becoming compliant with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements for scholarly activity and remaining compliant over time requires time and attention to the development of an environment of inquiry, which is reflected in detailed documentation submitted in program applications and annual updates. Since the beginning of the next accreditation system, all ACGME programs have been required to submit evidence of scholarly activity of both residents and faculty on an annual basis. Since 2014, American Osteopathic Association–accredited programs have been able to apply for ACGME accreditation under the Single Graduate Medical Education Accreditation initiative. The Residency Program Director, Chair, Designated Institutional Official, Faculty, and coordinator need to work cohesively to ensure compliance with all program requirements, including scholarly activity in order for American Osteopathic Association–accredited programs to receive Initial ACGME Accreditation and for current ACGME-accredited programs to maintain accreditation. Fortunately, there are many ways to show the type of scholarly activity that is required for the training of surgeons. In this article, we will review the ACGME General Surgery Program Requirements and definitions of scholarly activity. We will also offer suggestions for how programs may show evidence of scholarly activity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document