These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Similar deficiencies in procedural dermatology and dermatopathology fellow evaluation despite different periods of ACGME accreditation: results of a national survey.
    Author: Freeman SR, Nelson C, Lundahl K, Dellavalle RP.
    Journal: Dermatol Surg; 2008 Jul; 34(7):873-6; discussion 876-7. PubMed ID: 18363723.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Fellow evaluation is required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Procedural dermatology fellowship accreditation by the ACGME began in 2003 while dermatopathology accreditation began in 1976. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare fellow evaluation rigor between ACGME-accredited procedural dermatology and dermatopathology fellowships. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to fellowship directors of the ACGME-accredited (2006-2007) procedural dermatology and dermatopathology fellowship programs. Information was collected regarding evaluation form development, delivery, and collection. RESULTS: The response rates were 74% (25/34) and 53% (24/45) for procedural and dermatopathology fellowship programs, respectively. Sixteen percent (4/25) of procedural dermatology and 25% (6/24) of dermatopathology programs do not evaluate fellows. Fifty percent or less of program (4/8 procedural dermatology and 3/7 dermatopathology) evaluation forms address all six core competencies required by the ACGME. CONCLUSION: Procedural fellowships are evaluating fellows as rigorously as the more established dermatopathology fellowships. Both show room for improvement because one in five programs reported not evaluating fellows and roughly half of the evaluation forms provided do not address the six ACGME core competencies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]