Home Research Research Library Physician Opinions about American Board of Family Medicine Self-Assessment Modules (2006–2016) Physician Opinions about American Board of Family Medicine Self-Assessment Modules (2006–2016) 2019 Author(s) Dai, Mingliang, Hagen, Michael D, Eden, Aimee R, and Peterson, Lars E Topic(s) Family Medicine Certification Keyword(s) Self-Assessment And Lifelong Learning Volume Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Source Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Introduction: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) was implemented to help physicians remain current with evolving medical standards, but has been criticized for being irrelevant to practice. We assessed family physicians’ (FPs’) opinions about the content of American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) self-assessment modules (SAMs). Methods: We used ABFM administrative data from feedback surveys completed after each of the 16 SAMs from 2006 to 2016. FPs rated agreement with 2 statements—1) “Content is appropriate for my practice,” and 2) “Content was presented at an appropriate level”—on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). We calculated mean ratings of each statement by year and stratified by Knowledge Assessment (KA) and Clinical Simulation (CS) portions of the SAM. We plotted mean ratings by FPs’ age at their first SAM completion and the total number of SAMs completed. Results: SAMs were completed (n = 633,198) from 2006 to 2016 with 448,408 (71%) feedback surveys completed. The annual mean ratings of both statements varied little (less than 0.5) and were above 4.5 for all SAMs. CS ratings were consistently lower than KA ratings. FPs of all ages at first SAM provided similar ratings and agreement with content appropriateness increased with repeated exposure to SAMs. Conclusion: Over 11 years, the content of ABFM SAMs was regarded by FPs as appropriate for practice and presented at an appropriate level. Continued monitoring of feedback is necessary to keep the content of MOC programs relevant for physicians’ practice. ABFM Research Read all 2012 Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination Go to Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination 2022 HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL Go to HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL 2022 Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study Go to Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study 2016 The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations Go to The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations
Author(s) Dai, Mingliang, Hagen, Michael D, Eden, Aimee R, and Peterson, Lars E Topic(s) Family Medicine Certification Keyword(s) Self-Assessment And Lifelong Learning Volume Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Source Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
ABFM Research Read all 2012 Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination Go to Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination 2022 HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL Go to HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL 2022 Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study Go to Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study 2016 The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations Go to The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations
2012 Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination Go to Evaluating the Systematic Validity of a Medical Subspecialty Examination
2022 HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL Go to HIGH-STAKES KNOWLEDGE ASSESSMENT AT ABFM: WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND HOW IT IS USEFUL
2022 Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study Go to Physicians’ Choice of Board Certification Activity Is Unaffected by Baseline Quality of Care: The TRADEMaRQ Study
2016 The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations Go to The Predictive Validity of the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners’ COMLEX-USA Examinations With Regard to Outcomes on American Board of Family Medicine Examinations