MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recertification Now Requires a Secure Examination!

2004· article· en· W1996588943 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Craig Hillemeier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspecialtyMedicineAccreditationGraduate medical educationPediatric emergency medicineFamily medicineAdolescent medicineCertificationPediatric gastroenterologyPediatricsMEDLINEPulmonologyInternal medicineMedical educationNursingEmergency departmentHepatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The announcement by the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) that recertification in the pediatric subspecialties will no longer be satisfied by an open-book examination has caused concern among those holding subspecialty boards, including some of the 785 individuals with time-limited certificates in pediatric gastroenterology. Since the spring of 2003, those re-certifying in general pediatrics or a pediatric subspecialty have been required to demonstrate cognitive expertise by taking a secure examination. The examination is a half-day, closed-book test administered at computer testing centers throughout the United States, Canada, and abroad. The examinations are available 6 days per week for 2 months each year (mid-March to mid-April and mid-October to mid-November). The examinations focus on content related to the daily practice of the subspecialty and not on issues typically requiring the use of reference materials. Recertification is required every 7 years if an individual wishes to maintain active certification status. The ABP issues certificates of special qualifications in adolescent medicine, pediatric cardiology, pediatric critical care medicine, developmental–behavioral pediatrics, pediatric emergency medicine, pediatric endocrinology, pediatric gastroenterology, pediatric hematology–oncology, pediatric infectious diseases, neonatal–perinatal medicine, pediatric nephrology, pediatric pulmonology, and pediatric rheumatology. Certificates of added qualifications are given in medical toxicology, neurodevelopmental disabilities, and sports medicine. The ABP does not review or accredit pediatric subspecialty fellowship programs. This activity is undertaken by the Residency Review Committee under the auspices of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. The reason the ABP made the change to a secure examination is straightforward. A secure examination assures that the individual being recertified is the individual who has participated in this aspect of the recertification process. The 24 member boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) believe that if recertification is to be recognized as a valid instrument in the assessment of knowledge of a specialty or subspecialty, they must be able to demonstrate to the public that the individual being recertified is indeed the individual who has been tested. The “public” in this situation includes patients, families, state licensing boards, insurers, hospitals, and others. The ABP believes these entities should have the reasonable expectation that physicians remain knowledgeable about the practice elements of their field. Understanding the mission of the ABP will make the rationale for this change more apparent. The ABP was established to advance the science, study and practice of pediatrics by evaluating the credentials of physicians applying for certification as pediatricians, by examining applicants, and by certifying those who qualify. Certification includes initial specialty and subspecialty certification and maintenance of certification throughout one’s professional career. As stated in the purpose statement of the ABP, “The intent of certification is to provide assurance to the public and the medical profession that a certified pediatrician has successfully completed an accredited educational program and various evaluations, including an examination, and that the individual possesses the knowledge, skills, and experience requisite to the provision of the high-quality care in pediatrics.” The ABP is a member of the ABMS, which is the umbrella organization for the medical subspecialty boards. The ABMS has mandated the shift from the previous method of recertification. A task force of the ABMS created a framework of essential competencies, from which it developed a four-part model of maintenance of certification that all certifying boards will eventually employ. The four parts of the model are: 1) evidence of professional standing; 2) evidence of life-long learning and periodic self-assessment; 3) evidence of cognitive expertise; and 4) evidence of satisfactory performance in practice. Part 4 of the Program for Maintenance of Certification in Pediatrics (PMCP) will include quality improvement activities in our subspecialty that are being developed in collaboration with the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. Dr. James Stockman, President of the ABP, addressed concerns about PMCP in a letter to the editor of AAP News in June 2003. He agreed that, given the choice, few would prefer a secure examination to an open-book self-assessment. He noted, however, that health care providers, hospitals, managed care organizations, private insurers, state licensing bodies and other US government agencies had expressed increasing interest in the methods used to certify and recertify physicians. For example, some states waive the requirement for a state-administered examination for physicians relocating to the state only if the applicant has been recertified by a process that has included a secure examination. The open-book self-assessment examination previously used does not meet this criterion. Member boards of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) that previously permitted licensure on the basis of recertification no longer do so unless the recertification process includes a secure examination. Several states (Nevada and Texas are examples) are now considering a requirement for periodic cognitive assessment for relicensure. Participation in a recertification program that includes a secure examination will suffice for this purpose; otherwise, a state-administered examination will be given. If this FSMB activity progresses, pediatric gastroenterologists who do not maintain their subspecialty certification will face the possibility of taking a nonspecialty state-administered examination to be relicensed. The maintenance of certification program allows standards of competence to be set from within our discipline, rather than having standards imposed by state legislatures. The move to a secure examination by the ABP was thought to be its only responsible course of action. It is worth noting that all 24 certifying boards of the ABMS have or soon will have secure examinations as part of their maintenance of certification programs. The change to maintenance of certification that includes a secure examination allows the ABP to fulfill its mission, which is to certify pediatricians who are qualified to take care of children in their subspecialty.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3270.293

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207