Creating Consensus: Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement

Bryan G. Kane, Vicken Y. Totten, Chadd K. Kraus, Michael Allswede, Deborah Diercks, Nidhi Garg, Louis Ling, Eric N. McDonald, Alex M. Rosenau, Mike Wilk, Alexandria D. Holmes, Adam Hemminger, Marna Rayl Greenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: In the context of the upcoming single accreditation system for graduate medical education resulting from an agreement between the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), American Osteopathic Association and American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, we saw the opportunity for charting a new course for emergency medicine (EM) scholarly activity (SA). Our goal was to engage relevant stakeholders to produce a consensus document. Methods: Consensus building focused on the goals, definition, and endpoints of SA. Representatives from stakeholder organizations were asked to help develop a survey regarding the SA requirement. The survey was then distributed to those with vested interests. We used the preliminary data to find areas of concordance and discordance and presented them at a consensus-building session. Outcomes were then re-ranked. Results: By consensus, the primary role(s) of SA should be the following: 1) instruct residents in the process of scientific inquiry; 2) expose them to the mechanics of research; 3) teach them lifelong skills, including search strategies and critical appraisal; and 4) teach them how to formulate a question, search for the answer, and evaluate its strength. To meet these goals, the activity should have the general elements of hypothesis generation, data collection and analytical thinking, and interpretation of results. We also determined consensus on the endpoints, and acceptable documentation of the outcome. Conclusion: This consensus document may serve as a best-practices guideline for EM residency programs by delineating the goals, definitions, and endpoints for EM residents' SA. However, each residency program must evaluate its available scholarly activity resources and individually implement requirements by balancing the ACGME Review Committee for Emergency Medicine requirements with their own circumstances.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)369-375
Number of pages7
JournalThe western journal of emergency medicine
Volume20
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2019

Fingerprint

Emergency Medicine
Graduate Medical Education
Accreditation
Internship and Residency
Practice Guidelines
Osteopathic Medicine
Advisory Committees
Mechanics
Documentation
Organizations
Research
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

Creating Consensus : Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement. / Kane, Bryan G.; Totten, Vicken Y.; Kraus, Chadd K.; Allswede, Michael; Diercks, Deborah; Garg, Nidhi; Ling, Louis; McDonald, Eric N.; Rosenau, Alex M.; Wilk, Mike; Holmes, Alexandria D.; Hemminger, Adam; Greenberg, Marna Rayl.

In: The western journal of emergency medicine, Vol. 20, No. 2, 01.03.2019, p. 369-375.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kane, BG, Totten, VY, Kraus, CK, Allswede, M, Diercks, D, Garg, N, Ling, L, McDonald, EN, Rosenau, AM, Wilk, M, Holmes, AD, Hemminger, A & Greenberg, MR 2019, 'Creating Consensus: Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement', The western journal of emergency medicine, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 369-375. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2018.10.39293
Kane, Bryan G. ; Totten, Vicken Y. ; Kraus, Chadd K. ; Allswede, Michael ; Diercks, Deborah ; Garg, Nidhi ; Ling, Louis ; McDonald, Eric N. ; Rosenau, Alex M. ; Wilk, Mike ; Holmes, Alexandria D. ; Hemminger, Adam ; Greenberg, Marna Rayl. / Creating Consensus : Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement. In: The western journal of emergency medicine. 2019 ; Vol. 20, No. 2. pp. 369-375.
@article{8211bfee786c4b40a6c3b31f0d0629bb,
title = "Creating Consensus: Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement",
abstract = "Introduction: In the context of the upcoming single accreditation system for graduate medical education resulting from an agreement between the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), American Osteopathic Association and American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, we saw the opportunity for charting a new course for emergency medicine (EM) scholarly activity (SA). Our goal was to engage relevant stakeholders to produce a consensus document. Methods: Consensus building focused on the goals, definition, and endpoints of SA. Representatives from stakeholder organizations were asked to help develop a survey regarding the SA requirement. The survey was then distributed to those with vested interests. We used the preliminary data to find areas of concordance and discordance and presented them at a consensus-building session. Outcomes were then re-ranked. Results: By consensus, the primary role(s) of SA should be the following: 1) instruct residents in the process of scientific inquiry; 2) expose them to the mechanics of research; 3) teach them lifelong skills, including search strategies and critical appraisal; and 4) teach them how to formulate a question, search for the answer, and evaluate its strength. To meet these goals, the activity should have the general elements of hypothesis generation, data collection and analytical thinking, and interpretation of results. We also determined consensus on the endpoints, and acceptable documentation of the outcome. Conclusion: This consensus document may serve as a best-practices guideline for EM residency programs by delineating the goals, definitions, and endpoints for EM residents' SA. However, each residency program must evaluate its available scholarly activity resources and individually implement requirements by balancing the ACGME Review Committee for Emergency Medicine requirements with their own circumstances.",
author = "Kane, {Bryan G.} and Totten, {Vicken Y.} and Kraus, {Chadd K.} and Michael Allswede and Deborah Diercks and Nidhi Garg and Louis Ling and McDonald, {Eric N.} and Rosenau, {Alex M.} and Mike Wilk and Holmes, {Alexandria D.} and Adam Hemminger and Greenberg, {Marna Rayl}",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5811/westjem.2018.10.39293",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "369--375",
journal = "Western Journal of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "1936-900X",
publisher = "University of California",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Creating Consensus

T2 - Revisiting the Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Requirement

AU - Kane, Bryan G.

AU - Totten, Vicken Y.

AU - Kraus, Chadd K.

AU - Allswede, Michael

AU - Diercks, Deborah

AU - Garg, Nidhi

AU - Ling, Louis

AU - McDonald, Eric N.

AU - Rosenau, Alex M.

AU - Wilk, Mike

AU - Holmes, Alexandria D.

AU - Hemminger, Adam

AU - Greenberg, Marna Rayl

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Introduction: In the context of the upcoming single accreditation system for graduate medical education resulting from an agreement between the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), American Osteopathic Association and American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, we saw the opportunity for charting a new course for emergency medicine (EM) scholarly activity (SA). Our goal was to engage relevant stakeholders to produce a consensus document. Methods: Consensus building focused on the goals, definition, and endpoints of SA. Representatives from stakeholder organizations were asked to help develop a survey regarding the SA requirement. The survey was then distributed to those with vested interests. We used the preliminary data to find areas of concordance and discordance and presented them at a consensus-building session. Outcomes were then re-ranked. Results: By consensus, the primary role(s) of SA should be the following: 1) instruct residents in the process of scientific inquiry; 2) expose them to the mechanics of research; 3) teach them lifelong skills, including search strategies and critical appraisal; and 4) teach them how to formulate a question, search for the answer, and evaluate its strength. To meet these goals, the activity should have the general elements of hypothesis generation, data collection and analytical thinking, and interpretation of results. We also determined consensus on the endpoints, and acceptable documentation of the outcome. Conclusion: This consensus document may serve as a best-practices guideline for EM residency programs by delineating the goals, definitions, and endpoints for EM residents' SA. However, each residency program must evaluate its available scholarly activity resources and individually implement requirements by balancing the ACGME Review Committee for Emergency Medicine requirements with their own circumstances.

AB - Introduction: In the context of the upcoming single accreditation system for graduate medical education resulting from an agreement between the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), American Osteopathic Association and American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, we saw the opportunity for charting a new course for emergency medicine (EM) scholarly activity (SA). Our goal was to engage relevant stakeholders to produce a consensus document. Methods: Consensus building focused on the goals, definition, and endpoints of SA. Representatives from stakeholder organizations were asked to help develop a survey regarding the SA requirement. The survey was then distributed to those with vested interests. We used the preliminary data to find areas of concordance and discordance and presented them at a consensus-building session. Outcomes were then re-ranked. Results: By consensus, the primary role(s) of SA should be the following: 1) instruct residents in the process of scientific inquiry; 2) expose them to the mechanics of research; 3) teach them lifelong skills, including search strategies and critical appraisal; and 4) teach them how to formulate a question, search for the answer, and evaluate its strength. To meet these goals, the activity should have the general elements of hypothesis generation, data collection and analytical thinking, and interpretation of results. We also determined consensus on the endpoints, and acceptable documentation of the outcome. Conclusion: This consensus document may serve as a best-practices guideline for EM residency programs by delineating the goals, definitions, and endpoints for EM residents' SA. However, each residency program must evaluate its available scholarly activity resources and individually implement requirements by balancing the ACGME Review Committee for Emergency Medicine requirements with their own circumstances.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063281762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063281762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5811/westjem.2018.10.39293

DO - 10.5811/westjem.2018.10.39293

M3 - Article

C2 - 30881559

AN - SCOPUS:85063281762

VL - 20

SP - 369

EP - 375

JO - Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

JF - Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

SN - 1936-900X

IS - 2

ER -