ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2014
The Power of Collaboration: Experiences From the Educational Innovations Project and Implications for the Next Accreditation System.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Internal Medicine 2035: Preparing the Future Generation of Internists.Journal of graduate medical education · 2020Article
- The role of accreditation in 21st century health professions education: report of an International Consensus Group.BMC medical education · 2020Article
- Integration of Continuous Quality Improvement Methods Into Annual Program and Institutional Evaluation.Journal of graduate medical education · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Internal Medicine Educational Innovations Project (EIP) is a 10-year pilot project for innovating in accreditation, which involves annual reporting of information and less-restrictive requirements for a group of high-performing programs. The EIP program directors' experiences offer insight into the benefits and challenges of innovative approaches to accreditation as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education transitions to the Next Accreditation System.
objectiveWe assessed participating program directors' perceptions of the EIP at the midpoint of the project's 10-year life span.
methodsWe conducted telephone interviews with 15 of 18 current EIP programs (83% response rate) using a 19-item, open-ended, structured survey. Emerging themes were identified with content analysis.
resultsRespondents identified a number of the benefits from the EIP, most prominent among them, collaboration between programs (87%, 13 of 15) and culture change around quality improvement (47%, 7 of 15). The greatest benefit for residents was training in quality improvement methods (53%, 8 of 15), enhancing those residents' ability to become change agents in their future careers. Although the requirement for annual data reporting was identified by 60% (9 of 15) of program directors as the biggest challenge, respondents also considered it an important element for achieving progress on innovations. Program directors unanimously reported their ability to sustain innovation projects beyond the 10-year participation in EIP.
conclusionsThe work of EIP was not viewed as "more work," but as "different work," which created a new mindset of continuous quality improvement in residency training. Lessons learned offer insight into the value of collaboration and opportunities to use accreditation to foster innovation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.