ArticleAEM education and training2023
What to know about 2.0: Revisions to the pediatric emergency medicine milestones.
Article in AEM education and training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Entrustable professional activity use in emergency medicine: A scoping review.AEM education and training · 2025Article
- What to know about 2.0: Revisions to the pediatric emergency medicine milestones.AEM education and training · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) adopted educational milestones for trainee assessment in 2013, as a key component of the Next Accreditation System. Two years later, the ACGME, American Board of Pediatrics (ABP), and American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) collaborated to create specialty-specific subcompetencies in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM). Since that time, emerging data have demonstrated the need to revise specialty milestones. Consequently, the ACGME summoned a working group to revise the original PEM milestones. Methods: The PEM Milestones 2.0 Working Group convened in April 2021, comprising diverse representation from ACGME staff, PEM and EM attendings, PEM fellowship program directors, PEM fellows, and community members, overseen by the ACGME's vice president for milestones development. The group met virtually six times over 3 months, with concurrent independent and subgroup work, to draft the PEM Milestones 2.0 and supplemental guide. Results: The working group's revisions generated concise descriptions of behavioral anchors to define skill acquisition more accurately; attention to the transition from residency to fellowship training; incorporation of harmonized milestones for non-patient care and non-medical knowledge domains; and increased emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion. A supplemental guide was also designed to aid programs in designing programmatic assessment related to specialty-specific milestones. Conclusions: The PEM Milestones 2.0 provide an updated, specialty-specific framework to guide the development and assessment of PEM fellows and training programs. Future work may focus on faculty and learner development, advancing validity evidence, strengthening content expertise, and integrating milestones with specialty-specific entrustable professional activities.
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.