Dataset Information

Measuring the academic value of academic medical centers: describing a methodology for developing an evaluation model at one Academic Medical Center.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) must simultaneously serve different purposes: Delivery of high quality healthcare services to patients, as the main mission, supported by other core missions such as academic activities, i.e., researching, teaching and tutoring, while maintaining solvency. This study aims to develop a methodology for constructing models evaluating the academic value provided by AMCs and implementing it at the largest AMC in Israel.

Methods

Thirty five practiced educators and researchers, academic experts, faculty members and executives, all employed by a metropolitan 1500-bed AMC, were involved in developing academic quality indicators. First, an initial list of AMCs' academic quality indicators was drafted, using a literature review and consulting scholars. Afterwards, additional data and preferences were collected by conducting semi-structured interviews, complemented by a three-round Delphi Panel. Finally, the methodology for constructing a model evaluating the academic value provided by the AMC was developed.

Results

The composite academic quality indicators methodology consists of nine indicators (relative weight in parentheses): 'Scientific Publications Value' (18.7%), 'Completed Studies' (13.5%), 'Authors Value' (13.0%), 'Residents Quality' (11.3%), 'Competitive Grants Budget' (10.2%), 'Academic Training' (8.7%), 'Academic Positions' (8.3%), 'Number of Studies' (8.3%) and 'Academic Supervision' (8.0%). These indicators were grouped into three core categories: 'Education', 'Research' and 'Publications', having almost the same importance on a scale from zero to one (0-1), i.e., 0.363, 0.320, and 0.317, respectively. The results demonstrated a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach-alpha range: 0.79-0.86).

Conclusions

We have found a gap in the ability to measure academic value provided by AMCs. The main contribution of this research is the development of methodology for constructing evaluation models for AMCs academic performance. Further studies are needed to further test the validity and reliability of the proposed methodology at other sites.

SUBMITTER: Hod R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6681484 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring the academic value of academic medical centers: describing a methodology for developing an evaluation model at one Academic Medical Center.

Hod Rafael R Maimon Oded O Zimlichman Eyal E

Israel journal of health policy research 20190805 1

<h4>Background</h4>Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) must simultaneously serve different purposes: Delivery of high quality healthcare services to patients, as the main mission, supported by other core missions such as academic activities, i.e., researching, teaching and tutoring, while maintaining solvency. This study aims to develop a methodology for constructing models evaluating the academic value provided by AMCs and implementing it at the largest AMC in Israel.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirty five pra ...[more]

PMID: 31383017

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is unclear whether sites that screen large numbers of patients for Hepatitis C Virus but achieve limited follow-up are more or less effective at having patients succeed through linkage and treatment than lower volume sites that have higher linkage percentages. The objective was to compare the rates of HCV identification, linkage to care, and treatment success between different study sites including the Emergency Department, 3 outpatient clinics with unique patients, and the inpatient setting at one medical center.MethodsThis is a descriptive analysis of 2 years of data from a protocol that integrated HCV screening and treatment into clinical services throughout multiple departments in one medical center. The program used a best practice advisory to prompt testing at all sites, with different triggers for it to fire at each site, and one central navigation program that attempted to link all patients diagnosed with hepatitis C virus to outpatient care. Outcomes included volume of tests performed in each site, Antibody and RNA rates at each site, demographic data, navigation and linkage outcomes, and post-linkage treatment completion.Results28,435 patients were screened across 5 clinical locations. RNA+ rates and absolute numbers linked to MD (linkage rates among all RNA+) were: ED 7.2% RNA+, 224 (22.6%) linked; Inpatient 14.8% RNA+, 27 (17.6%) linked, General Internal Medicine 3.9% RNA+, 269 (65.8%) linked, Infectious Diseases 4.0% RNA+, 34(70.8%) linked, Family Medicine 2.0% RNA+, 28 (75.7%) linked. Demographics, linkage barriers, and treatment initiation rates were different at all sites.ConclusionAmong sites there were differences in the sociodemographic characteristics of patients diagnosed with HCV, as well as differences in the success linking patients to outpatient care. At this medical center, the ED screened the most patients, the inpatient area had the highest RNA positivity rate, the FM clinic had the highest linkage rate, GIM linked the most patients by absolute number, and GIM also had the highest number of patients start treatment.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The first year of graduate medical education is an important period in the professional development of physicians. Disruptive behavior interferes with safe and effective clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and nature of disruptive behavior perceived by interns and attending physicians in a teaching hospital environment. METHOD: All 516 interns at Partners HealthCare (Boston, MA) during the 2010 and 2011 academic years were eligible to complete an anonymous questionnaire. A convenience nonrandom sample of 40 attending physicians also participated. RESULTS: A total of 394 of 516 eligible interns (76.4%) participated. Attendings and interns each reported that their team members generally behaved professionally (87.5% versus 80.4%, respectively). A significantly greater proportion of attendings than interns felt respected at work (90.0% versus 71.5% respectively; P = .01). Disruptive behavior was experienced by 93% of interns; 54% reported that they experienced it once a month or more. Interns reported disruptive behavior significantly more frequently than attending physicians, including increased reports of condescending behavior (odds ratio [OR], 5.46 for interns compared with attendings; P < .001), exclusion from decision making (OR, 6.97; P < .001), and berating (OR, 4.84; P = .02). Inappropriate jokes, abusive language, and gender bias were also reported, and they were not significantly more frequent among interns than attending physicians. Interns most frequently identified nurses as the source of disruption, and were significantly more likely than faculty to identify nurses as the source of disruptive behavior (OR, 10.40; P < .001). Attendings reported other physicians as the most frequent source of disruption. CONCLUSIONS: Although interns generally feel respected at work, they frequently experience disruptive behavior. Interns described more disruptive behaviors than a convenience sample of attending physicians at our institution.

Dataset Information

Measuring the academic value of academic medical centers: describing a methodology for developing an evaluation model at one Academic Medical Center.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Measuring the academic value of academic medical centers: describing a methodology for developing an evaluation model at one Academic Medical Center.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets