Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41555894›Full record

ArticleMedical science educator2025

Benefits, Challenges, and Opportunities of LCME Accreditation: A National Survey.

Colleen Hayden, David Muller, Allan R Tunkel, Reena Karani, Jennifer Christner, Abbas Hyderi, Robert Fallar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Colleen HaydenUniversity of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine, Columbia, MO USA.
David MullerIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY USA.
Allan R TunkelWarren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI USA.
Reena KaraniIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY USA.
Jennifer ChristnerDept of Education, Innovation and Technology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX USA.
Abbas HyderiUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Robert FallarIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2968-7630

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Accreditation is a vital component of maintaining the quality of health professions education. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accredits allopathic medical schools in the USA. There have been anecdotal expressions of dissatisfaction with the process of accreditation by faculty and staff involved with the process; however, there is no extant literature describing this. This study captures the opinions of individuals at medical schools involved in LCME accreditation and explores the perceived benefits and challenges schools have experienced. Materials and Methods: A 23-item survey sought respondents' opinions regarding their experiences with LCME accreditation. The survey universe included members of the Accreditation Preparation and Quality Improvement listserv. Responses were summarized using univariate analyses; content analysis of open-ended responses was completed. Results: Complete responses were received from 131 individuals. Highlighted key benefits to accreditation include fostering a culture of continuous quality improvement, uniting stakeholders into the self-study, and identifying needed curricular resources. Conversely, highlighted challenges include the resources necessary to prepare for an accreditation review, the reliance on student satisfaction data, and a perceived lack of clarity to the accreditation standards and elements. The demands of preparing for an accreditation review are seen as significant contributors to stress. Discussion: The data highlight the benefits of the LCME accreditation review process but also suggest several areas for improvement. There is a need to share this data with the LCME and work towards an improved process that can better align the LCME with its constituent schools to support the goals of the accreditation process.

Indexed as

AccreditationQuality improvementSurvey researchUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID41555894
PMCPMC12812134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.