医学院符合评审标准的证据:比较世界医学教育联合会认可机构的自我评估指南。

IF 3.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Medical Teacher Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-26 DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2024.2430361
Yuxing E Ma, Sean Tackett
{"title":"医学院符合评审标准的证据:比较世界医学教育联合会认可机构的自我评估指南。","authors":"Yuxing E Ma, Sean Tackett","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2430361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Accreditation is a key regulatory strategy to ensure high-quality medical education occurs across the world's growing number of medical schools. There is general agreement on standards for medical schools, but no consensus on the evidence needed to show standards are being met. This study characterized the evidence solicited from schools by World Federation for Medical Education (WFME)-recognized agencies.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We collected documents from WFME-recognized agencies as of July 2022. We aligned self-evaluation guidance with relevant WFME standards, then compared common features of evaluation guidance across agencies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We obtained 75 documents (2460 pages) from 21 of 28 WFME-recognized agencies, which collectively accredited 690 programs in 57 independent states covering a population of over 1.8 billion people. Self-evaluation guidance varied by the amount of information provided by an agency, structure for reporting, and data types requested from schools. Overall, requirements ranged from completing a database hundreds of pages long to drafting a maximum 50-page report outlining strengths and weaknesses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Evidence requested from schools to demonstrate they met accreditation standards varied widely. This has implications for the reliability of accreditation judgments and resources required in school self-evaluations to ensure accreditation processes are aligned with the needs of learners, educators, and the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":" ","pages":"1352-1359"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence medical schools are meeting accreditation standards: Comparison of self-evaluation guidance from WFME-recognized agencies.\",\"authors\":\"Yuxing E Ma, Sean Tackett\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2430361\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Accreditation is a key regulatory strategy to ensure high-quality medical education occurs across the world's growing number of medical schools. There is general agreement on standards for medical schools, but no consensus on the evidence needed to show standards are being met. This study characterized the evidence solicited from schools by World Federation for Medical Education (WFME)-recognized agencies.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We collected documents from WFME-recognized agencies as of July 2022. We aligned self-evaluation guidance with relevant WFME standards, then compared common features of evaluation guidance across agencies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We obtained 75 documents (2460 pages) from 21 of 28 WFME-recognized agencies, which collectively accredited 690 programs in 57 independent states covering a population of over 1.8 billion people. Self-evaluation guidance varied by the amount of information provided by an agency, structure for reporting, and data types requested from schools. Overall, requirements ranged from completing a database hundreds of pages long to drafting a maximum 50-page report outlining strengths and weaknesses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Evidence requested from schools to demonstrate they met accreditation standards varied widely. This has implications for the reliability of accreditation judgments and resources required in school self-evaluations to ensure accreditation processes are aligned with the needs of learners, educators, and the public.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1352-1359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2430361\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2430361","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评审是一项重要的监管策略,可确保在全球日益增多的医学院校中开展高质量的医学教育。人们对医学院校的标准已达成普遍共识,但对证明学校达到标准所需的证据却未达成共识。本研究描述了世界医学教育联合会(WFME)认可的机构向学校征集的证据:我们从世界医学教育联合会认可机构收集了截至2022年7月的文件。我们将自我评估指南与 WFME 的相关标准进行了比对,然后比较了各机构评估指南的共同特征:我们从28个WFME认可机构中的21个机构获得了75份文件(2460页),这些机构共认可了57个独立州的690个项目,覆盖人口超过18亿。自我评估指南因机构提供的信息量、报告结构和要求学校提供的数据类型而有所不同。总体而言,要求从完成一个长达数百页的数据库到起草一份最多 50 页的概述优缺点的报告不等:结论:要求学校提供的证明其达到评审标准的证据差别很大。这对评审判断的可靠性和学校自我评估所需的资源都有影响,以确保评审过程符合学习者、教育工作者和公众的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence medical schools are meeting accreditation standards: Comparison of self-evaluation guidance from WFME-recognized agencies.

Purpose: Accreditation is a key regulatory strategy to ensure high-quality medical education occurs across the world's growing number of medical schools. There is general agreement on standards for medical schools, but no consensus on the evidence needed to show standards are being met. This study characterized the evidence solicited from schools by World Federation for Medical Education (WFME)-recognized agencies.

Materials and methods: We collected documents from WFME-recognized agencies as of July 2022. We aligned self-evaluation guidance with relevant WFME standards, then compared common features of evaluation guidance across agencies.

Results: We obtained 75 documents (2460 pages) from 21 of 28 WFME-recognized agencies, which collectively accredited 690 programs in 57 independent states covering a population of over 1.8 billion people. Self-evaluation guidance varied by the amount of information provided by an agency, structure for reporting, and data types requested from schools. Overall, requirements ranged from completing a database hundreds of pages long to drafting a maximum 50-page report outlining strengths and weaknesses.

Conclusions: Evidence requested from schools to demonstrate they met accreditation standards varied widely. This has implications for the reliability of accreditation judgments and resources required in school self-evaluations to ensure accreditation processes are aligned with the needs of learners, educators, and the public.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Teacher
Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信