Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao The Laryngoscopearrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
The Laryngoscope
Article . 2011 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
The Laryngoscope
Article . 2011
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Use of portfolios in otolaryngology graduate medical education

Authors: Richard K, Gurgel; Robert A, Miller; Richard J H, Smith;

Use of portfolios in otolaryngology graduate medical education

Abstract

AbstractObjectives/Hypothesis:Learning portfolios, as defined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), are professional development tools for resident education. Moreover, the scope of portfolio use is expanding to become a component of the accreditation system, with likely mandatory implementation by 2016. The objective of this study is to describe the extent of portfolio use in otolaryngology training programs and resident attitudes toward portfolios.Study Design:Cross‐sectional survey.Methods:All residents in ACGME‐accredited otolaryngology programs were contacted via email linked to an online survey. One follow‐up email was sent after initial notification.Results:Three hundred eighteen (22%) of the 1,431 invited residents responded to the survey, representing 65 of 103 ACGME‐accredited otolaryngology training programs. Fifty‐eight percent of the programs represented had residents who maintained a portfolio. When asked to what extent portfolios enhanced education, 39% of residents who kept a portfolio found them helpful, 27% were neutral, and 35% did not find them helpful, although 60% plan to use their portfolio after residency. For those residents who did not maintain a portfolio, 70% cited they did not maintain a portfolio because it is not a requirement in their program. Twenty‐one percent of all respondents felt that portfolios should be mandatory, whereas 61% felt that portfolios should be encouraged, but not required.Conclusions:Although portfolios are encouraged by the ACGME, and will ultimately become mandatory, they are not yet fully integrated in otolaryngology training programs. Only a minority of residents in this study thought portfolios enhanced education.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Otolaryngology, Cross-Sectional Studies, Education, Medical, Graduate, Teaching, Humans, Clinical Competence, Documentation, Educational Measurement

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!