The Accreditation System After the “Next Accreditation System”
Abstract
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Medical Specialties and its member boards introduced the six domains of physician competency in 1999. This initiated a national dialogue concerning the elements of competency of the physician, and incorporation of these elements into the framework of evaluation of residents and fellows, as well as the educational programs within which they are trained. The next step in this process will be the ACGME's Next Accreditation System, which the authors describe in this commentary. Recognizing that there are already developments in the assessment of medical education that will influence future models of accreditation, the authors consider some of these innovations and discuss how they may shape the next accreditation system after the Next Accreditation System.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Despite significant investment, the program struggled to pragmatically ensure all three components of entrustment - direct observation, feedback, and reflective practice - were fully integrated into the coaching program, with direct observation posing a unique logistic challenge.
“Despite significant investment, we struggled to pragmatically ensure all three components of entrustment – direct observation, feedback, and reflective practice – were fully integrated into the coaching program, with direct observation posing a unique logistic challenge [3,50].”
Cites
The ACGME outcome project: retrospective and prospective
Swing, S. R. (2007) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590701392903 · Cited by 964 · see citing works
The Clinical Learning Environment
Weiss, K. B., Bagian, J. P., & Nasca, T. J. (2013) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2013.1931 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gonzalo, J. D., Wolpaw, D. R., Krok, K. L., Pfeiffer, M. P., & McCall-Hosenfeld, J. S. (2019) · Medical Education Online · doi:10.1080/10872981.2019.1591256 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nasca, T. J., Weiss, K. B., Bagian, J. P., & Brigham, T. P.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nasca, Thomas J.
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-29
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2322909062
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 7.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
- Keywords
- Next Accreditation System, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, American Board of Medical Specialties, graduate medical education, physician competence, residency program accreditation
- MeSH terms
- Accreditation, Education, Medical, Graduate, Humans, Professional Competence, Specialty Boards, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
