Knowledge of GME Across an Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Context: Graduate medical education (GME) programs in the United States (US) are responsible for developing the future physician workforce. While GME funding remains a critical aspect of physician training, it is being considered as an area that can be potentially targeted for cuts by the federal government to solve budgetary issues. To better understand physician knowledge of GME funding overall in our region, we surveyed GME program directors of an osteopathic GME consortium to assess their knowledge level of GME funding. Methods: The sample size for this study consisted of 25 program directors of either residency or fellowship programs in the Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium of Oklahoma (OMECO). Assessment of the program directors was through a survey-based tracking tool. Results: A total of 12 responses were received for the survey. The most notable and significant finding of the survey was the general lack of knowledge regarding GME programs. With respect to DGME funding, 83% of respondents were unaware of the amount of funding the program received for resident stipends. Additionally, none of the respondents were aware how much funding was received for faculty programming. Conclusions: GME funding is critical to the advancement of medicine in the US. The knowledge of GME funding must be enhanced at the program director level to ensure that those ground leaders of GME can take the funding message to a higher level.
Original languageAmerican English
JournalOklahoma State Medical Proceedings
Volume1
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Graduate Medical Education
Medical Education
Physicians
Federal Government
Internship and Residency
Sample Size
Medicine
Surveys and Questionnaires

Cite this

@article{a8bd691b7e9240e5a71cd2a450bcd67c,
title = "Knowledge of GME Across an Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium",
abstract = "Context: Graduate medical education (GME) programs in the United States (US) are responsible for developing the future physician workforce. While GME funding remains a critical aspect of physician training, it is being considered as an area that can be potentially targeted for cuts by the federal government to solve budgetary issues. To better understand physician knowledge of GME funding overall in our region, we surveyed GME program directors of an osteopathic GME consortium to assess their knowledge level of GME funding. Methods: The sample size for this study consisted of 25 program directors of either residency or fellowship programs in the Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium of Oklahoma (OMECO). Assessment of the program directors was through a survey-based tracking tool. Results: A total of 12 responses were received for the survey. The most notable and significant finding of the survey was the general lack of knowledge regarding GME programs. With respect to DGME funding, 83{\%} of respondents were unaware of the amount of funding the program received for resident stipends. Additionally, none of the respondents were aware how much funding was received for faculty programming. Conclusions: GME funding is critical to the advancement of medicine in the US. The knowledge of GME funding must be enhanced at the program director level to ensure that those ground leaders of GME can take the funding message to a higher level.",
author = "Jeffrey Stroup and James Hess",
year = "2018",
language = "American English",
volume = "1",
journal = "Oklahoma State Medical Proceedings",
issn = "2475-8914",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Knowledge of GME Across an Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium

AU - Stroup, Jeffrey

AU - Hess, James

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Context: Graduate medical education (GME) programs in the United States (US) are responsible for developing the future physician workforce. While GME funding remains a critical aspect of physician training, it is being considered as an area that can be potentially targeted for cuts by the federal government to solve budgetary issues. To better understand physician knowledge of GME funding overall in our region, we surveyed GME program directors of an osteopathic GME consortium to assess their knowledge level of GME funding. Methods: The sample size for this study consisted of 25 program directors of either residency or fellowship programs in the Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium of Oklahoma (OMECO). Assessment of the program directors was through a survey-based tracking tool. Results: A total of 12 responses were received for the survey. The most notable and significant finding of the survey was the general lack of knowledge regarding GME programs. With respect to DGME funding, 83% of respondents were unaware of the amount of funding the program received for resident stipends. Additionally, none of the respondents were aware how much funding was received for faculty programming. Conclusions: GME funding is critical to the advancement of medicine in the US. The knowledge of GME funding must be enhanced at the program director level to ensure that those ground leaders of GME can take the funding message to a higher level.

AB - Context: Graduate medical education (GME) programs in the United States (US) are responsible for developing the future physician workforce. While GME funding remains a critical aspect of physician training, it is being considered as an area that can be potentially targeted for cuts by the federal government to solve budgetary issues. To better understand physician knowledge of GME funding overall in our region, we surveyed GME program directors of an osteopathic GME consortium to assess their knowledge level of GME funding. Methods: The sample size for this study consisted of 25 program directors of either residency or fellowship programs in the Osteopathic Medical Education Consortium of Oklahoma (OMECO). Assessment of the program directors was through a survey-based tracking tool. Results: A total of 12 responses were received for the survey. The most notable and significant finding of the survey was the general lack of knowledge regarding GME programs. With respect to DGME funding, 83% of respondents were unaware of the amount of funding the program received for resident stipends. Additionally, none of the respondents were aware how much funding was received for faculty programming. Conclusions: GME funding is critical to the advancement of medicine in the US. The knowledge of GME funding must be enhanced at the program director level to ensure that those ground leaders of GME can take the funding message to a higher level.

M3 - Article

VL - 1

JO - Oklahoma State Medical Proceedings

JF - Oklahoma State Medical Proceedings

SN - 2475-8914

IS - 2

ER -