Evidence-based medicine and contemporary certification: Analysis of the American Board of Vascular Medicine endovascular board examination

David P. Slovut, Bruce H. Gray, Amin Saiar, Mark C. Bates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Since 2005, the American Board of Vascular Medicine (ABVM) endovascular examination has been used to certify vascular practitioners. Annual rigorous review has confirmed it is psychometrically valid and reliable. However, the evidence basis underlying the examination items has not been studied systematically. The aim of this study was to adjudicate class of recommendation (COR) and level of evidence (LOE) for the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination and establish an additional feedback mechanism for examination improvement based on contemporary evidence-based guidelines. We performed a pooled consensus process to classify each of the 110 items in the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination by COR and LOE as detailed in the current guideline statements. We added additional categories for items that were not eligible for assignment using traditional current evidence-based metrics: 'COR X', cannot be determined, not applicable, or simple recognition; and 'LOE X', cannot be determined or not applicable. COR classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Class I=15%, Class II=40%, Class III=3%, COR X=42%. LOE classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Level A=12%, Level B=34%, Level C=32%, LOE X=22%. Our analysis showed that nearly half of the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination items were supported by strong scientific evidence or fact-based knowledge. COR and LOE analysis yielded notably different results. Use of alternate classification schema may be powerful tools for improving certification exams in healthcare.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)337-342
Number of pages6
JournalVascular Medicine (United Kingdom)
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Medicine
Certification
Cardiology
Guidelines
Blood Vessels
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • board certification
  • endovascular
  • examination
  • quality assurance
  • vascular medicine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Evidence-based medicine and contemporary certification : Analysis of the American Board of Vascular Medicine endovascular board examination. / Slovut, David P.; Gray, Bruce H.; Saiar, Amin; Bates, Mark C.

In: Vascular Medicine (United Kingdom), Vol. 22, No. 4, 01.08.2017, p. 337-342.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{06b71ad084fb439ea86fd92a18606794,
title = "Evidence-based medicine and contemporary certification: Analysis of the American Board of Vascular Medicine endovascular board examination",
abstract = "Since 2005, the American Board of Vascular Medicine (ABVM) endovascular examination has been used to certify vascular practitioners. Annual rigorous review has confirmed it is psychometrically valid and reliable. However, the evidence basis underlying the examination items has not been studied systematically. The aim of this study was to adjudicate class of recommendation (COR) and level of evidence (LOE) for the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination and establish an additional feedback mechanism for examination improvement based on contemporary evidence-based guidelines. We performed a pooled consensus process to classify each of the 110 items in the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination by COR and LOE as detailed in the current guideline statements. We added additional categories for items that were not eligible for assignment using traditional current evidence-based metrics: 'COR X', cannot be determined, not applicable, or simple recognition; and 'LOE X', cannot be determined or not applicable. COR classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Class I=15{\%}, Class II=40{\%}, Class III=3{\%}, COR X=42{\%}. LOE classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Level A=12{\%}, Level B=34{\%}, Level C=32{\%}, LOE X=22{\%}. Our analysis showed that nearly half of the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination items were supported by strong scientific evidence or fact-based knowledge. COR and LOE analysis yielded notably different results. Use of alternate classification schema may be powerful tools for improving certification exams in healthcare.",
keywords = "board certification, endovascular, examination, quality assurance, vascular medicine",
author = "Slovut, {David P.} and Gray, {Bruce H.} and Amin Saiar and Bates, {Mark C.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1358863X17702727",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "337--342",
journal = "Vascular Medicine (United Kingdom)",
issn = "1358-863X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence-based medicine and contemporary certification

T2 - Analysis of the American Board of Vascular Medicine endovascular board examination

AU - Slovut, David P.

AU - Gray, Bruce H.

AU - Saiar, Amin

AU - Bates, Mark C.

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Since 2005, the American Board of Vascular Medicine (ABVM) endovascular examination has been used to certify vascular practitioners. Annual rigorous review has confirmed it is psychometrically valid and reliable. However, the evidence basis underlying the examination items has not been studied systematically. The aim of this study was to adjudicate class of recommendation (COR) and level of evidence (LOE) for the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination and establish an additional feedback mechanism for examination improvement based on contemporary evidence-based guidelines. We performed a pooled consensus process to classify each of the 110 items in the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination by COR and LOE as detailed in the current guideline statements. We added additional categories for items that were not eligible for assignment using traditional current evidence-based metrics: 'COR X', cannot be determined, not applicable, or simple recognition; and 'LOE X', cannot be determined or not applicable. COR classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Class I=15%, Class II=40%, Class III=3%, COR X=42%. LOE classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Level A=12%, Level B=34%, Level C=32%, LOE X=22%. Our analysis showed that nearly half of the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination items were supported by strong scientific evidence or fact-based knowledge. COR and LOE analysis yielded notably different results. Use of alternate classification schema may be powerful tools for improving certification exams in healthcare.

AB - Since 2005, the American Board of Vascular Medicine (ABVM) endovascular examination has been used to certify vascular practitioners. Annual rigorous review has confirmed it is psychometrically valid and reliable. However, the evidence basis underlying the examination items has not been studied systematically. The aim of this study was to adjudicate class of recommendation (COR) and level of evidence (LOE) for the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination and establish an additional feedback mechanism for examination improvement based on contemporary evidence-based guidelines. We performed a pooled consensus process to classify each of the 110 items in the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination by COR and LOE as detailed in the current guideline statements. We added additional categories for items that were not eligible for assignment using traditional current evidence-based metrics: 'COR X', cannot be determined, not applicable, or simple recognition; and 'LOE X', cannot be determined or not applicable. COR classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Class I=15%, Class II=40%, Class III=3%, COR X=42%. LOE classifications were assigned in the following proportion: Level A=12%, Level B=34%, Level C=32%, LOE X=22%. Our analysis showed that nearly half of the 2015 ABVM endovascular examination items were supported by strong scientific evidence or fact-based knowledge. COR and LOE analysis yielded notably different results. Use of alternate classification schema may be powerful tools for improving certification exams in healthcare.

KW - board certification

KW - endovascular

KW - examination

KW - quality assurance

KW - vascular medicine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026906846&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026906846&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1358863X17702727

DO - 10.1177/1358863X17702727

M3 - Article

C2 - 28594284

AN - SCOPUS:85026906846

VL - 22

SP - 337

EP - 342

JO - Vascular Medicine (United Kingdom)

JF - Vascular Medicine (United Kingdom)

SN - 1358-863X

IS - 4

ER -