Abstract: Purpose: Accreditation aims to ensure all training programs meet agreed-upon standards of quality. The process is complex, resource intensive, and costly. Its benefits are difficult to assess because contextual confounds obscure comparisons between systems that do and do not include accreditation. This study explores accreditation's influence "within system" by investigating the relationship between accreditation cycle and performance on a national licensing examination.
Method: Scores on the computer-based portion of the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination Part I, from 1993 to 2017, were examined for all 17 Canadian medical schools. Typically completed upon graduation from medical school, results within each year were transformed for comparability across administrations and linked to timing within each school's accreditation cycle. ANOVAs were used to assess the relationship between accreditation timing and examination scores. Secondary analyses isolated 4-year from 3-year training programs and separated data generated before versus after implementation of a national midcycle informal review program.
Results: Performance on the licensing exam was highest during and shortly after an accreditation site visit, falling significantly until the midpoint in the accreditation cycle (d = 0.47) before rising again. This pattern disappeared after introduction of informal interim review, but too little data have accumulated post implementation to determine if interim review is sufficient to break the influence of accreditation cycle.
Conclusions: Formal, externally driven, accreditation cycles appear associated with educational processes in ways that translated into student outcomes on a national licensing examination. Whether informal, internal, interim reviews can mediate this effect remains to be seen.
References: van Zanten M, Norcini JJ, Boulet JR, Simon F. Overview of accreditation of undergraduate medical education programmes worldwide. Med Educ. 2008; 42:930–937.
van Zanten M, Boulet JR, Greaves I. The importance of medical education accreditation standards. Med Teach. 2012; 34:136–145.
Davis DJ, Ringsted C. Accreditation of undergraduate and graduate medical education: How do the standards contribute to quality?. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2006; 11:305–313.
Barzansky B, Hunt D, Moineau G, et al. Continuous quality improvement in an accreditation system for undergraduate medical education: Benefits and challenges. Med Teach. 2015; 37:1032–1038.
Blouin D, Tekian A. Accreditation of medical education programs: Moving from student outcomes to continuous quality improvement measures. Acad Med. 2018; 93:377–383.
Blouin D, Tekian A, Kamin C, Harris IB. The impact of accreditation on medical schools’ processes. Med Educ. 2018; 52:182–191.
Greenfield D, Braithwaite J. Health sector accreditation research: A systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care. 2008; 20:172–183.
Kulasegaram KM, Tonin P, Houston P, Whitehead C. Accreditation drives medical education. Does evidence drive accreditation?. Med Educ. 2018; 52:772–773.
van Zanten M. The association between medical education accreditation and the examination performance of internationally educated physicians seeking certification in the United States. Perspect Med Educ. 2015; 4:142–145.
van Zanten M, McKinley D, Durante Montiel I, Pijano CV. Medical education accreditation in Mexico and the Philippines: Impact on student outcomes. Med Educ. 2012; 46:586–592.
Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee WD, et al. Association between licensure examination scores and practice in primary care. JAMA. 2002; 288:3019–3026.
De Champlain AF, Streefkerk C, Roy M, Tian F, Qin S, Brailovsky C. Predicting family medicine specialty certification status using standardized measures. J Med Regul. 2014; 100:8–16.
Wenghofer E, Klass D, Abrahamowicz M, et al. Doctor scores on national qualifying examinations predict quality of care in future practice. Med Educ. 2009; 43:1166–1173.
Committee on Accreditation of Canadian Medical Schools. Accreditation procedure. https://cacms-cafmc.ca/about-cacms/accreditation-procedure. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Committee on Accreditation of Canadian Medical Schools. Standards and elements. https://cacms-cafmc.ca/accreditation-documents/2019-2020/standards-and-elements. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada. Accreditation. https://afmc.ca/faculties/accreditation. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Medical Council of Canada. Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination Part I. https://mcc.ca/examinations/mccqe-part-i. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Grace-Martin K. Why report estimated marginal means in SPSS GLM? The Analysis Factor. https://www.theanalysisfactor.com/why-report-estimated-marginal-means-in-spss-glm. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Blouin D. Quality improvement in medical schools: Vision meets culture. Med Educ. 2019; 53:1100–1110.
Blouin D, Tekian A, Harris IB. Do organizational cultures of Canadian medical schools promote a quality culture?. Med Teach. 2019; 41:662–667.
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. CanMEDS: Better standards, better physicians, better care. http://www.royalcollege.ca/rcsite/canmeds/canmeds-framework-e. Accessed July 10, 2020.
Processing Request
No Comments.