Medical Education Outcomes, American Medical Association, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Milestone Development and Evaluation, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Med Educ. 2015 Nov;49(11):1086-102. doi: 10.1111/medu.12831.
Competency-based medical education (CBME) has emerged as a core strategy to educate and assess the next generation of physicians. Advantages of CBME include: a focus on outcomes and learner achievement; requirements for multifaceted assessment that embraces formative and summative approaches; support of a flexible, time-independent trajectory through the curriculum; and increased accountability to stakeholders with a shared set of expectations and a common language for education, assessment and regulation.
Despite the advantages of CBME, numerous concerns and challenges to the implementation of CBME frameworks have been described, including: increased administrative requirements; the need for faculty development; the lack of models for flexible curricula, and inconsistencies in terms and definitions. Additionally, there are concerns about reductionist approaches to assessment in CBME, lack of good assessments for some competencies, and whether CBME frameworks include domains of current importance. This study will outline these issues and discuss the responses of the medical education community.
The concerns and challenges expressed are primarily categorised as: (i) those related to practical, administrative and logistical challenges in implementing CBME frameworks, and (ii) those with more conceptual or theoretical bases. The responses of the education community to these issues are then summarised.
The education community has begun to address the challenges involved in implementing CBME. Models and guidance exist to inform implementation strategies across the continuum of education, and focus on the more efficient use of resources and technology, and the use of milestones and entrustable professional activities-based frameworks. Inconsistencies in CBME definitions and frameworks remain a significant obstacle. Evolution in assessment approaches from in vitro task-based methods to in vivo integrated approaches is responsive to many of the theoretical and conceptual concerns about CBME, but much work remains to be done to bring rigour and quality to work-based assessment.
以能力为基础的医学教育(CBME)已成为教育和评估下一代医生的核心策略。CBME 的优势包括:关注成果和学习者的成就;需要采用形成性和总结性方法的多方面评估;支持通过课程的灵活、独立于时间的轨迹;并增加对利益相关者的责任,他们具有一套共同的期望和教育、评估和监管的共同语言。
尽管 CBME 具有优势,但已描述了实施 CBME 框架的许多关注和挑战,包括:行政要求增加;教师发展的需要;灵活课程模式的缺乏,以及术语和定义的不一致。此外,还存在对 CBME 评估中的简化方法、某些能力缺乏良好评估以及 CBME 框架是否包含当前重要领域的担忧。本研究将概述这些问题并讨论医学教育界的回应。
所表达的关注和挑战主要分为两类:(i)与实施 CBME 框架的实际、行政和后勤挑战有关,以及(ii)与更具概念性或理论性基础的挑战。然后总结了教育界对这些问题的回应。
教育界已开始解决实施 CBME 所涉及的挑战。模型和指南存在于整个教育连续体中,用于告知实施策略,并侧重于更有效地利用资源和技术,以及使用里程碑和基于可委托专业活动的框架。CBME 定义和框架的不一致仍然是一个重大障碍。从体外基于任务的方法到体内综合方法的评估方法的演变,对 CBME 的许多理论和概念性关注做出了回应,但仍有许多工作要做,以使基于工作的评估具有严谨性和质量。