评审对本科医学教育项目持续质量改进过程的影响:范围综述。

MedEdPublish (2016) Pub Date : 2024-05-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/mep.20142.2
Sateesh B Arja, Bobbie Ann White, Jabeen Fayyaz, Anne Thompson
{"title":"评审对本科医学教育项目持续质量改进过程的影响:范围综述。","authors":"Sateesh B Arja, Bobbie Ann White, Jabeen Fayyaz, Anne Thompson","doi":"10.12688/mep.20142.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accreditation in medical education has existed for more than 100 years, yet the impact of accreditation remains inconclusive. Some studies have shown the effects of accreditation on student outcomes and educational processes at medical schools. However, evidence showing the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement of undergraduate medical education programs is still in its infancy. This scoping review explores the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement (CQI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review followed the methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and the Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). Databases, including PubMed, Medline, ERIC, CINHAL, and Google Scholar, were searched to find articles from 2000 to 2022 related to the accreditation of undergraduate medical education programs and continuous quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 35 full-text articles were reviewed, and ten articles met our inclusion criteria. The review of the full-text articles yielded four themes: Accreditation and its standards in general, Accreditation and its impact on student outcomes, Accreditation and its impact on medical school's educational processes, Accreditation and CQI. However, the literature evidence suggesting the impact of accreditation on CQI is minimal. The quality assurance approach is based on meeting the standards of accreditation. The quality improvement approach is based on striving for excellence. Literature suggests a requirement to move from student outcomes to CQI measures. CQI requires everyone in the organization to take responsibility and accountability, considering quality as the result of every single step or process and leaders supporting improvements in data collection and data analysis for quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The literature on accreditation and CQI are limited in number. More research studies are required to enhance undergraduate medical education accreditation practices' value to medical students, educators, academic leaders, programs, and the public. It was recommended that medical schools embrace the culture and vision perpetuated by the CQI process.</p>","PeriodicalId":74136,"journal":{"name":"MedEdPublish (2016)","volume":"14 ","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11126904/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement process in undergraduate medical education programs: A scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Sateesh B Arja, Bobbie Ann White, Jabeen Fayyaz, Anne Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/mep.20142.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accreditation in medical education has existed for more than 100 years, yet the impact of accreditation remains inconclusive. Some studies have shown the effects of accreditation on student outcomes and educational processes at medical schools. However, evidence showing the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement of undergraduate medical education programs is still in its infancy. This scoping review explores the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement (CQI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review followed the methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and the Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). Databases, including PubMed, Medline, ERIC, CINHAL, and Google Scholar, were searched to find articles from 2000 to 2022 related to the accreditation of undergraduate medical education programs and continuous quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 35 full-text articles were reviewed, and ten articles met our inclusion criteria. The review of the full-text articles yielded four themes: Accreditation and its standards in general, Accreditation and its impact on student outcomes, Accreditation and its impact on medical school's educational processes, Accreditation and CQI. However, the literature evidence suggesting the impact of accreditation on CQI is minimal. The quality assurance approach is based on meeting the standards of accreditation. The quality improvement approach is based on striving for excellence. Literature suggests a requirement to move from student outcomes to CQI measures. CQI requires everyone in the organization to take responsibility and accountability, considering quality as the result of every single step or process and leaders supporting improvements in data collection and data analysis for quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The literature on accreditation and CQI are limited in number. More research studies are required to enhance undergraduate medical education accreditation practices' value to medical students, educators, academic leaders, programs, and the public. It was recommended that medical schools embrace the culture and vision perpetuated by the CQI process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"volume\":\"14 \",\"pages\":\"13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11126904/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.20142.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedEdPublish (2016)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.20142.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:医学教育评审已存在 100 多年,但评审的影响仍无定论。一些研究显示了评审对医学院学生成绩和教育过程的影响。然而,显示评审对本科医学教育项目持续质量改进的影响的证据仍处于起步阶段。本范围界定综述探讨了评审对持续质量改进(CQI)的影响:本范围界定综述遵循 Arksey 和 O'Malley (2005 年)概述的系统综述首选报告项目和范围界定综述 Meta 分析扩展(PRISMA-ScR)清单的方法。我们检索了包括 PubMed、Medline、ERIC、CINHAL 和 Google Scholar 在内的数据库,以查找 2000 年至 2022 年期间与本科医学教育项目认证和持续质量改进相关的文章:共查阅了 35 篇全文文章,其中 10 篇符合我们的纳入标准。对全文文章的审查产生了四个主题:评审及其一般标准、评审及其对学生成绩的影响、评审及其对医学院教育过程的影响、评审与持续质量改进。然而,文献证据表明评审对 CQI 的影响微乎其微。质量保证方法以达到评审标准为基础。而质量改进方法则以追求卓越为基础。文献表明,需要从衡量学生成绩转向衡量 CQI。CQI 要求组织中的每一个人都承担责任和义务,将质量视为每一个步骤或过程的结果,领导者支持改进数据收集和数据分析,以提高质量:有关评审和 CQI 的文献数量有限。结论:有关评审和 CQI 的文献数量有限,需要进行更多的研究,以提高本科医学教育评审实践对医学生、教育工作者、学术领导者、项目和公众的价值。建议医学院校接受 CQI 过程所延续的文化和愿景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement process in undergraduate medical education programs: A scoping review.

Background: Accreditation in medical education has existed for more than 100 years, yet the impact of accreditation remains inconclusive. Some studies have shown the effects of accreditation on student outcomes and educational processes at medical schools. However, evidence showing the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement of undergraduate medical education programs is still in its infancy. This scoping review explores the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement (CQI).

Methods: This scoping review followed the methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and the Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). Databases, including PubMed, Medline, ERIC, CINHAL, and Google Scholar, were searched to find articles from 2000 to 2022 related to the accreditation of undergraduate medical education programs and continuous quality improvement.

Results: A total of 35 full-text articles were reviewed, and ten articles met our inclusion criteria. The review of the full-text articles yielded four themes: Accreditation and its standards in general, Accreditation and its impact on student outcomes, Accreditation and its impact on medical school's educational processes, Accreditation and CQI. However, the literature evidence suggesting the impact of accreditation on CQI is minimal. The quality assurance approach is based on meeting the standards of accreditation. The quality improvement approach is based on striving for excellence. Literature suggests a requirement to move from student outcomes to CQI measures. CQI requires everyone in the organization to take responsibility and accountability, considering quality as the result of every single step or process and leaders supporting improvements in data collection and data analysis for quality improvement.

Conclusions: The literature on accreditation and CQI are limited in number. More research studies are required to enhance undergraduate medical education accreditation practices' value to medical students, educators, academic leaders, programs, and the public. It was recommended that medical schools embrace the culture and vision perpetuated by the CQI process.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 weeks
期刊最新文献
Medical students' knowledge on palliative care - a survey of teaching in Finland. Developing a clinician-friendly rubric for assessing history-taking skills in medical undergraduates speaking English as a foreign language. A retrospective feedback analysis of objective structured clinical examination performance of undergraduate medical students. Guidelines for Integrating actionable A-SMART Learning Outcomes into the Backward Design Process. Practical tips for teaching medicine in the metaverse.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1