Becky Ness, Justine Herndon, Chelsey Hoffmann, Susan Benysh, Carrie Bowler, Winston Tan
{"title":"我们取得进展了吗?联合认证前后,持续专业发展课程的教师和课程主任的跨专业多样性。","authors":"Becky Ness, Justine Herndon, Chelsey Hoffmann, Susan Benysh, Carrie Bowler, Winston Tan","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S509639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to quantify the impact of joint accreditation on the prevalence of physician and non-physician continuous professional development (CPD) course directors(CDs) and faculty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CPD CDs and faculty credentials were collected in 2017 (one-year pre-joint accreditation) and 2022 (one-year post-joint accreditation), using electronic and manual data extraction. CPD CDs and faculty were grouped into physician and non-physician cohorts for the quantitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant increase in the number of non-physician CDs was observed from 2017 (11.3%) to 2022 (22.5%). There were significantly more non-physician faculty at non-physician-focused courses (8.7 ± 8.1 faculty compared to 2.6 ± 4.1 at physician-focused conferences, p = 0.003) with a large effect size, Cohen's <i>d</i> = -1.32 [95% CI -1.8, -0.9]. Finally, while physicians had statistically higher faculty scores for all three measurements (p < 0.001), the effect sizes were small (Cohen's <i>d</i> ranging 0.18-0.20).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Increased diversity in CDs and faculty was noted when comparing pre- and post-joint accreditation suggesting compliance with joint accreditation standards and the growing emphasis on team-based healthcare. Future research is needed to investigate barriers to CPD participation as CDs and faculty for both physician and non-physician healthcare team members. Additional research will continue to help expand diverse professional representation among CDs and faculty within CPD courses.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"16 ","pages":"607-613"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12009032/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Have We Made Progress? Interprofessional Diversity Within Faculty and Course Directors of Continuous Professional Development Courses Pre- and Post-Joint Accreditation.\",\"authors\":\"Becky Ness, Justine Herndon, Chelsey Hoffmann, Susan Benysh, Carrie Bowler, Winston Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/AMEP.S509639\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to quantify the impact of joint accreditation on the prevalence of physician and non-physician continuous professional development (CPD) course directors(CDs) and faculty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CPD CDs and faculty credentials were collected in 2017 (one-year pre-joint accreditation) and 2022 (one-year post-joint accreditation), using electronic and manual data extraction. CPD CDs and faculty were grouped into physician and non-physician cohorts for the quantitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant increase in the number of non-physician CDs was observed from 2017 (11.3%) to 2022 (22.5%). There were significantly more non-physician faculty at non-physician-focused courses (8.7 ± 8.1 faculty compared to 2.6 ± 4.1 at physician-focused conferences, p = 0.003) with a large effect size, Cohen's <i>d</i> = -1.32 [95% CI -1.8, -0.9]. Finally, while physicians had statistically higher faculty scores for all three measurements (p < 0.001), the effect sizes were small (Cohen's <i>d</i> ranging 0.18-0.20).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Increased diversity in CDs and faculty was noted when comparing pre- and post-joint accreditation suggesting compliance with joint accreditation standards and the growing emphasis on team-based healthcare. Future research is needed to investigate barriers to CPD participation as CDs and faculty for both physician and non-physician healthcare team members. Additional research will continue to help expand diverse professional representation among CDs and faculty within CPD courses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"607-613\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12009032/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S509639\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S509639","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究旨在量化联合认证对医师和非医师持续专业发展(CPD)课程主任(cd)和教师患病率的影响。方法:收集2017年(联合认证前一年)和2022年(联合认证后一年)的CPD光盘和教师资格证书,采用电子和人工提取数据。CPD cd和教师被分为医师和非医师两组进行定量分析。结果:从2017年(11.3%)到2022年(22.5%),非医师CDs数量显著增加。在以非医生为重点的课程中,有更多的非医生教师(8.7±8.1名教师,而以医生为重点的会议为2.6±4.1名教师,p = 0.003),效应量很大,Cohen’s d = -1.32 [95% CI -1.8, -0.9]。最后,虽然医生在所有三项测量中都有统计上较高的教师得分(p < 0.001),但效应量很小(科恩d值范围为0.18-0.20)。结论:在比较联合认证前后,cd和教员的多样性增加,表明遵守联合认证标准和越来越重视团队医疗保健。未来的研究需要调查医师和非医师医疗团队成员作为cd和教师参与CPD的障碍。进一步的研究将继续帮助扩大cd和教师在持续专业发展课程中的专业代表性。
Have We Made Progress? Interprofessional Diversity Within Faculty and Course Directors of Continuous Professional Development Courses Pre- and Post-Joint Accreditation.
Objective: This study aimed to quantify the impact of joint accreditation on the prevalence of physician and non-physician continuous professional development (CPD) course directors(CDs) and faculty.
Methods: CPD CDs and faculty credentials were collected in 2017 (one-year pre-joint accreditation) and 2022 (one-year post-joint accreditation), using electronic and manual data extraction. CPD CDs and faculty were grouped into physician and non-physician cohorts for the quantitative analysis.
Results: A significant increase in the number of non-physician CDs was observed from 2017 (11.3%) to 2022 (22.5%). There were significantly more non-physician faculty at non-physician-focused courses (8.7 ± 8.1 faculty compared to 2.6 ± 4.1 at physician-focused conferences, p = 0.003) with a large effect size, Cohen's d = -1.32 [95% CI -1.8, -0.9]. Finally, while physicians had statistically higher faculty scores for all three measurements (p < 0.001), the effect sizes were small (Cohen's d ranging 0.18-0.20).
Conclusion: Increased diversity in CDs and faculty was noted when comparing pre- and post-joint accreditation suggesting compliance with joint accreditation standards and the growing emphasis on team-based healthcare. Future research is needed to investigate barriers to CPD participation as CDs and faculty for both physician and non-physician healthcare team members. Additional research will continue to help expand diverse professional representation among CDs and faculty within CPD courses.