A suggested outline for writing curriculum development journal articles: the IDCRD format.

BACKGROUND: During the past decade, medical school and residency faculty have been active in developing and revising curricula for medical education programs. Many of these curriculum development efforts ultimately are published in peer-reviewed professional journals as articles or abstracts. Unlike research publications, no uniform format currently exists for reporting curriculum development efforts in the peer-reviewed literature. SUMMARY: A suggested format for organizing curriculum development manuscripts consists of the introduction, development, curriculum, results, and discussion (IDCRD). Detailed descriptions of each section are discussed herein. CONCLUSIONS: The IDCRD manuscript outline is intended to provide useful guidance to medical educators in publishing their curriculum development efforts. Journal editors are encouraged to recognize the importance of providing uniform descriptions of curricula so that readers can benefit from the experience of others and replicate successful curriculum efforts.

A needs assessment for a palliative care curriculum.

To ensure the success of a new curriculum at an institution, information about the educational needs of learners, available resources, and potential obstacles needs to be systematically collected and analyzed prior to the development and implementation of the actual curriculum. This process, known as needs assessment, is important in the development of palliative care training for internal medicine residents, because internal medicine has only recently begun to address these issues in a formalized way and palliative care is a relatively new topic in medical education and clinical medicine. Therefore, institutional issues and resistance, lack of knowledge and appropriate attitudes among trainees and faculty, and a paucity of educational models for individual internal medicine training programs present potential obstacles. Although curricula that have been developed by national organizations can serve as "guideposts, " these documents are unable to address the specific needs and culture of an individual institution. This paper outlines a systematic methodology of needs assessment for palliative care curricula at individual institutions that could be applied to the development and implementation of palliative care training for different groups of learners. An institution-specific needs assessment was developed based upon the findings of a systematic literature review and interviews with experts in palliative medicine and medical education. The following methods were utilized: 1) an anonymous survey; 2) focus groups; 3) topic rankings; and 4) individual interviews. The needs assessment revealed the following educational, clinical, and institutional information: 1) interns had very little exposure to palliative care in medical school; 2) there was no formalized system formal education and clinical exposure; 3) tremendous interest in palliative care education existed; 4) patients, families, physicians, and nurses perceived a need to improve the quality of palliative care; and 5) there are several political, logistical, and resource (time and financial) obstacles that needed to be addressed. An institution-specific needs assessment is an important part of the successful development and implementation of any new curriculum for medical residents and was specifically necessary for our palliative care program. As a result of the needs assessment process, a curriculum consisting of ten units of case-based and problem-based teaching was successfully implemented.

Pilot test of family medicine faculty development fellowship accreditation guidelines.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a pilot test of accreditation guidelines for family medicine faculty development fellowship programs from September 1997 to March 1999. The accreditation guidelines included 8 application categories with 27 requirements and 5 self-study criteria. The process included completion of the accreditation application and self-study and a site visit. We selected 6 sites for participation in the pilot test, and 5 sites completed all steps. The results indicated that, while fellowship faculty felt that the requirements and criteria were valid for determining quality of faculty development fellowship programs, the process was time-consuming and could be shortened. Redundancy between information supplied on the application and on the self-study was also noted. Six recommendations were included in the final report, including streamlining the accreditation process, developing guidelines for probationary status, and considering alternatives to accreditation, such as peer review.