Rachel Gottlieb-Smith, Danny Rogers, Donald L Gilbert
{"title":"修改后的德尔菲研究就儿童神经病学住院医师教育达成共识:下一代培训。","authors":"Rachel Gottlieb-Smith, Danny Rogers, Donald L Gilbert","doi":"10.1212/WNL.0000000000210002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Rapid advances in diagnostics and treatments are shifting child neurology practice, but child neurology training requirements have been much slower to change. Previous literature confirms strong support for modernization, but no formal consensus exists regarding maintaining or changing training. We aimed to develop a holistic consensus regarding the optimal training pathway and requirements using a modified Delphi process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors invited 48 child neurologists as panelists, intentionally selecting to represent the diverse geography, practice type, subspecialties, and other demographics of child neurologists practicing in the United States. Panelists participated in an anonymized modified Delphi study with 4 rounds evaluating statements regarding current training requirements, core rotation durations, and mandatory subspecialty rotations with the option to agree or disagree. Statements were derived from current Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, and American Board of Pediatrics requirements for child neurology training and recent literature. Statements that did not reach a predefined level of consensus (≥75% agreement or disagreement on a 7-point Likert scale) were re-queried or modified for subsequent rounds. Panelists had access to all previous anonymized results and comments. The final modifications were presented in round 4 as a comprehensive training proposal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven panelists agreed to participate, with most completing all 4 rounds. In round 1, consensus was reached on 45 of 118 (38%) items; round 2, 28 of 87 (32%); round 3, 16 of 25 (64%); and round 4, 1 of 1 (100%). There was consensus regarding the age scope of practice and certain subspecialties that should be required, but no initial consensus regarding time-based requirements. By round 4, consensus emerged for the following rotations-months: neonatal and pediatric intensive care-4, adolescent medicine-0.5, emergency medicine-1.5, inpatient pediatrics-3, outpatient pediatrics-3.5, inpatient child neurology-9.5, outpatient child neurology-6, inpatient adult neurology-3, outpatient adult neurology-2, genetics-2, EEG/neurophysiology-2, neuroimaging-1, child psychiatry-1, and electives-7.5. The consensus schedule consists of 46.5 total months of requirements.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study suggests that, despite diverging views prevalent among child neurologists, a diverse panel can, through a multiround Delphi process, arrive at consensus regarding many core features of the child neurology training structure and certification requirements.</p>","PeriodicalId":19256,"journal":{"name":"Neurology","volume":"103 11","pages":"e210002"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modified Delphi Study to Establish Consensus About Child Neurology Residency Education: Next-Gen Training.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Gottlieb-Smith, Danny Rogers, Donald L Gilbert\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/WNL.0000000000210002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Rapid advances in diagnostics and treatments are shifting child neurology practice, but child neurology training requirements have been much slower to change. Previous literature confirms strong support for modernization, but no formal consensus exists regarding maintaining or changing training. We aimed to develop a holistic consensus regarding the optimal training pathway and requirements using a modified Delphi process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors invited 48 child neurologists as panelists, intentionally selecting to represent the diverse geography, practice type, subspecialties, and other demographics of child neurologists practicing in the United States. Panelists participated in an anonymized modified Delphi study with 4 rounds evaluating statements regarding current training requirements, core rotation durations, and mandatory subspecialty rotations with the option to agree or disagree. Statements were derived from current Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, and American Board of Pediatrics requirements for child neurology training and recent literature. Statements that did not reach a predefined level of consensus (≥75% agreement or disagreement on a 7-point Likert scale) were re-queried or modified for subsequent rounds. Panelists had access to all previous anonymized results and comments. The final modifications were presented in round 4 as a comprehensive training proposal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven panelists agreed to participate, with most completing all 4 rounds. In round 1, consensus was reached on 45 of 118 (38%) items; round 2, 28 of 87 (32%); round 3, 16 of 25 (64%); and round 4, 1 of 1 (100%). There was consensus regarding the age scope of practice and certain subspecialties that should be required, but no initial consensus regarding time-based requirements. By round 4, consensus emerged for the following rotations-months: neonatal and pediatric intensive care-4, adolescent medicine-0.5, emergency medicine-1.5, inpatient pediatrics-3, outpatient pediatrics-3.5, inpatient child neurology-9.5, outpatient child neurology-6, inpatient adult neurology-3, outpatient adult neurology-2, genetics-2, EEG/neurophysiology-2, neuroimaging-1, child psychiatry-1, and electives-7.5. The consensus schedule consists of 46.5 total months of requirements.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study suggests that, despite diverging views prevalent among child neurologists, a diverse panel can, through a multiround Delphi process, arrive at consensus regarding many core features of the child neurology training structure and certification requirements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology\",\"volume\":\"103 11\",\"pages\":\"e210002\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000210002\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000210002","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modified Delphi Study to Establish Consensus About Child Neurology Residency Education: Next-Gen Training.
Background and objectives: Rapid advances in diagnostics and treatments are shifting child neurology practice, but child neurology training requirements have been much slower to change. Previous literature confirms strong support for modernization, but no formal consensus exists regarding maintaining or changing training. We aimed to develop a holistic consensus regarding the optimal training pathway and requirements using a modified Delphi process.
Methods: The authors invited 48 child neurologists as panelists, intentionally selecting to represent the diverse geography, practice type, subspecialties, and other demographics of child neurologists practicing in the United States. Panelists participated in an anonymized modified Delphi study with 4 rounds evaluating statements regarding current training requirements, core rotation durations, and mandatory subspecialty rotations with the option to agree or disagree. Statements were derived from current Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, and American Board of Pediatrics requirements for child neurology training and recent literature. Statements that did not reach a predefined level of consensus (≥75% agreement or disagreement on a 7-point Likert scale) were re-queried or modified for subsequent rounds. Panelists had access to all previous anonymized results and comments. The final modifications were presented in round 4 as a comprehensive training proposal.
Results: Twenty-seven panelists agreed to participate, with most completing all 4 rounds. In round 1, consensus was reached on 45 of 118 (38%) items; round 2, 28 of 87 (32%); round 3, 16 of 25 (64%); and round 4, 1 of 1 (100%). There was consensus regarding the age scope of practice and certain subspecialties that should be required, but no initial consensus regarding time-based requirements. By round 4, consensus emerged for the following rotations-months: neonatal and pediatric intensive care-4, adolescent medicine-0.5, emergency medicine-1.5, inpatient pediatrics-3, outpatient pediatrics-3.5, inpatient child neurology-9.5, outpatient child neurology-6, inpatient adult neurology-3, outpatient adult neurology-2, genetics-2, EEG/neurophysiology-2, neuroimaging-1, child psychiatry-1, and electives-7.5. The consensus schedule consists of 46.5 total months of requirements.
Discussion: This study suggests that, despite diverging views prevalent among child neurologists, a diverse panel can, through a multiround Delphi process, arrive at consensus regarding many core features of the child neurology training structure and certification requirements.
期刊介绍:
Neurology, the official journal of the American Academy of Neurology, aspires to be the premier peer-reviewed journal for clinical neurology research. Its mission is to publish exceptional peer-reviewed original research articles, editorials, and reviews to improve patient care, education, clinical research, and professionalism in neurology.
As the leading clinical neurology journal worldwide, Neurology targets physicians specializing in nervous system diseases and conditions. It aims to advance the field by presenting new basic and clinical research that influences neurological practice. The journal is a leading source of cutting-edge, peer-reviewed information for the neurology community worldwide. Editorial content includes Research, Clinical/Scientific Notes, Views, Historical Neurology, NeuroImages, Humanities, Letters, and position papers from the American Academy of Neurology. The online version is considered the definitive version, encompassing all available content.
Neurology is indexed in prestigious databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Biological Abstracts®, PsycINFO®, Current Contents®, Web of Science®, CrossRef, and Google Scholar.