Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Perina D.G.,American Board of Emergency Medicine | Brunett C.P.,Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors | Caro D.A.,The American College | Char D.M.,The American College | And 5 more authors.
Academic Emergency Medicine | Year: 2012

The 2011 Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2012; 19:000-000 © 2012 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Source


Beeson M.S.,Akron General Medical Center | Marco C.A.,University of Toledo | Nelson R.N.,Ohio State University | Korte R.C.,American Board of Emergency Medicine
Journal of Emergency Medicine | Year: 2013

Background: The Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine is the basis for the content specifications of all American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) examinations. This study describes the frequency with which ABEM diplomates diagnose and manage the conditions and components listed in the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to determine the frequency with which ABEM diplomates diagnose and manage the conditions and components described in the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. Methods: The listing of conditions and components of the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine were sent to 16,230 randomly selected ABEM diplomates. One of five surveys was sent to each diplomate. Each condition and component was assessed by participants for the frequency that emergency physicians diagnose (D) and manage (M) that condition, as seen in their practice of Emergency Medicine. Results: Of the 16,230 surveys sent, 5006 were returned (30.8% response rate). The genders of the respondents were 75% male and 24% female. The ages of the respondents were primarily in the age 40-49 years, and 30-39 years age groups. All categories of the listing of conditions and components of the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine were encountered frequently in the practice of Emergency Medicine, as indicated by study participants. Conclusions: A survey of practicing ABEM diplomates was useful in defining the frequency with which specific conditions and components are diagnosed and managed in the practice of Emergency Medicine. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. Source


Marco C.A.,Wright State University | Wahl R.P.,Wayne State University | Counselman F.L.,Eastern Virginia Medical School | Heller B.N.,St Mary Medical Center | And 4 more authors.
Academic Emergency Medicine | Year: 2016

Objectives To maintain certification by the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM), physicians are required to pass the Continuous Certification (ConCert) examination at least every 10 years. On the 2014 ConCert postexamination survey, ABEM sought to understand the manner in which ABEM diplomates prepared for the test and to identify associations between test preparation approaches and performance on the ConCert examination. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study. The survey was administered at the end of the 2014 ConCert examination. Analyses included chi-square and linear regression to determine the association of preparation methods with performance. Results Of the 2,431 on-time test-takers, 2,338 (96.2%) were included. The most commonly used study approach was the review of written materials designed for test preparation (1,585; 67.8%), followed by an online training course (1,006; 43.0%). There were 758 (32.4%) physicians who took a single onsite board review course, while 41 (1.8%) took two or more onsite courses. Most physicians (1,611; 68.9%) spent over 35 hours preparing for the ConCert examination. The study method that was most associated with favorable test scores was the review of written materials designed for test preparation (p < 0.001). Attending an onsite preparation course was associated with poorer performance (p < 0.001). There was a significant association between no additional preparation and failing the examination (chi-square with Yates correction; p = 0.001). Conclusions A substantial majority (97.8%) of physicians taking the 2014 ABEM ConCert examination prepared for it. The majority of physicians used written materials specifically designed for test preparation. Reviewing written materials designed for test preparation was associated with the highest performance. © 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Source


Marco C.A.,University of Toledo | Counselman F.L.,Eastern Virginia Medical School | Korte R.C.,American Board of Emergency Medicine | Russ C.M.,American Board of Emergency Medicine | And 2 more authors.
Academic Emergency Medicine | Year: 2014

Objectives The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program is a four-step process that includes the Continuous Certification (ConCert) examination. The ConCert examination is a validated, summative examination that assesses medical knowledge and clinical reasoning. ABEM began administering the ConCert examination in 1989. The ConCert examination must be passed at least every 10 years to maintain certification. This study was undertaken to determine longitudinal physician performance on the ConCert examination. Methods In this longitudinal review, ConCert examination performance was compared among residency-trained emergency physicians (EPs) over multiple examination cycles. Longitudinal analysis was performed using a growth curve model for unbalanced data to determine the growth trajectories of EP performance over time to see if medical knowledge changed. Using initial certification qualifying examination scores, the longitudinal analysis corrected for intrinsic variances in physician ability. Results There were 15,085 first-time testing episodes from 1989 to 2012 involving three examination cycles. The mean adjusted examination scores for all physicians taking the ConCert examination for a first cycle was 85.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 85.8 to 85.9), the second cycle mean score was 86.2 (95% CI = 86.0 to 86.3), and the third cycle was 85.4 (95% CI = 85.0 to 85.8). Using the first examination cycle as a reference score, the growth curve model analysis resulted in a coefficient of +0.3 for the second cycle (p < 0.001) and -0.5 for the third cycle (p = 0.02). Initial qualifying (written) examination scores were significant predictors for ConCert examination scores. Conclusions Over time, EP performance on the ConCert examination was maintained. These results suggest that EPs maintain medical knowledge over the course of their careers as measured by a validated, summative medical knowledge assessment. © 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Source


Marco C.A.,University of Toledo | Counselman F.L.,Eastern Virginia Medical School | Korte R.C.,American Board of Emergency Medicine | Purosky R.G.,American Board of Emergency Medicine | And 2 more authors.
Academic Emergency Medicine | Year: 2014

Objectives The initial step in certification by the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) requires passing a multiple-choice-question qualifying examination. The qualifying examination is typically taken in the first year after residency training. This study was undertaken to determine if a delay in taking the qualifying examination is associated with poorer performance. The authors also examined the relationship between in-training examination scores and qualifying examination scores. Methods This was a pooled time-series cross-section study. Primary measurements were initial qualifying examination scores, the timing of the qualifying examination, and in-training examination scores. The three groups, based on qualifying examination timing, were immediate, 1-year delay, and ≥2-year delay. In-training examination scores were analyzed to determine the relationship between intrinsic ability, examination timing, and qualifying examination scores. For analysis, a generic pooled ordinary least-squares dummy variable model with robust standard errors was used. A pre hoc level of significance was determined to be α < 0.01. Results There were 16,353 qualifying examination test administrations between 2000 and 2012. In-training examination scores were positively correlated with qualifying examination scores (p < 0.001). The group pass rates were 98.9% immediate, 95.6% 1-year delay, and 86.6% ≥2-year delay. After controlling for in-training examination scores, delay taking the qualifying examination of 1 year was associated with a decrease in score of -0.6 (p = 0.003). A delay in taking the qualifying examination ≥2 years was associated with a decrease in score of -2.5 points (p < 0.001). Conclusions After accounting for innate ability using in-training examination scores, delay taking the qualifying examination was associated with poorer performance. This effect was more pronounced if the delay was ≥2 years. © 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Source

Discover hidden collaborations