From the Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (SS); VA Boston Health Care System, Boston, Massachusetts (SS); American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rochester, Minnesota (CLK, MMR); Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona (CLK); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (SWD); University of Texas Health Science Center, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas (GEF); TIRR Memorial Hermann Hospital, Houston, Texas (GEF); and University of Toronto, St John's Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (LRR).
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2022 Jul 1;101(7 Suppl 1):S35-S39. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000002015. Epub 2022 Mar 28.
Recognizing the dearth of published research on board certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation and its subspecialties, the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation has increased efforts to conduct and disseminate research in this area. This report summarizes key findings of peer-reviewed studies published by American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation staff and leadership in the past 6 yrs, including those conducted in partnership with other entities. The reported studies are organized in three main categories: initial certification, continuing certification, and subspecialty certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation. Related findings are further grouped into subsections that include psychometric evaluation of certification examinations, association of candidate characteristics with certification performance, relationship of certification performance to other measures, and candidate reaction and feedback. Collectively, the summarized results provide evidence that the board certification process is reliable, statistically valid, and predictive of the risk of disciplinary action in subsequent years. These studies also describe facets of our specialty including degree of subspecialization, burnout, and how people maintain certification over time. We hope that physical medicine and rehabilitation trainees, diplomates, institutions, programs, and other stakeholders find this information useful and look forward to continuing research in these and other areas in the spirit of constant evidence-based improvement and feedback to our specialty.
认识到物理医学与康复以及其亚专业领域的董事会认证研究的匮乏,美国物理医学与康复委员会已经加大了在这一领域进行和传播研究的力度。本报告总结了过去 6 年中美国物理医学与康复委员会工作人员和领导层在同行评审研究中发表的关键发现,其中包括与其他实体合作进行的研究。报告的研究主要分为三类:物理医学与康复的初始认证、持续认证和亚专业认证。相关发现进一步分为以下几个部分,包括认证考试的心理测量评估、候选人特征与认证表现的关联、认证表现与其他衡量标准的关系,以及候选人的反应和反馈。总的来说,总结的结果表明,董事会认证过程是可靠的、具有统计学意义的,并且可以预测未来几年纪律处分的风险。这些研究还描述了我们专业的各个方面,包括专业化程度、倦怠程度,以及人们如何随着时间的推移保持认证。我们希望物理医学与康复的学员、毕业生、机构、项目和其他利益相关者觉得这些信息有用,并期待着本着不断进行基于证据的改进和向我们的专业提供反馈的精神,在这些领域和其他领域继续进行研究。