The ASCP Resident Physician Section: results of surveys pertaining to "graduated responsibility for residents in anatomic pathology". American Society of Cytopathology

Graduate Medical Education in Pathology: A Scoping Review

CONTEXT.—

Pathologists have produced a substantial body of literature on graduate medical education (GME). However, this body of literature is diverse and has not yet been characterized.

OBJECTIVE.—

To chart the concepts, research methods, and publication patterns of studies on GME in pathology.

DATA SOURCES.—

This was a systematic scoping review covering all literature produced since 1980 in the PubMed and Embase databases.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Research on GME in pathology is evenly dispersed across educational topics. This body of literature would benefit from research based on theory, stronger study designs, and studies that can provide evidence to support decisions on educational policies.

Adequacy of pathology resident training for employment: a survey report from the Future of Pathology Task Group

CONTEXT

The recent change in accreditation requirements for anatomic pathology and clinical pathology residency training from 5 to 4 years and the rapid advances in technologies for pathology services have sparked a renewed debate over the adequacy of pathology residency training. In particular, perceived deficiencies in training have been declared from a variety of sources, both in the form of recent editorial opinions and from surveys of community hospital pathologist employers in 1998, 2003, and 2005 by Dr Richard Horowitz.

OBJECTIVE

To obtain more comprehensive data on the perceptions of strengths and weaknesses in pathology residency training.

DESIGN

The College of American Pathologists conducted a survey of potential pathology employers (senior College of American Pathologists members, members designated as head of group, and members of the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology). Also surveyed were recent graduates of pathology residency programs, who were identified as being junior members of the College of American Pathologists, were recent recipients of certification from the American Board of Pathology, or were contacted through their directors of pathology residency programs.

RESULTS

There were 559 employer respondents, of whom 384 were responsible for hiring and/or supervising new pathologists. There were 247 recent graduates of pathology residency training programs who responded. From the employers' standpoint, the majority expressed overall satisfaction with recent graduates, but almost one third of employers indicated that new hires had a major deficiency in a critical area. Specific areas of deficiency were clinical laboratory management and judgment in ordering special stains and studies. In addition, one half of employers agreed that more guidance and support for newly trained pathologists is needed now than was required 10 years ago. Academic employers generally were more satisfied than private sector employers. Newly trained pathologists did not appear to be inappropriately overconfident in their abilities. In addition, their perceptions of those specific areas in which they are most and least prepared are very similar to the ratings provided by employers. On average, newly trained pathologists' ratings of their own preparedness are highest for specific aspects of general pathology and anatomic pathology, and lowest for specific aspects of clinical pathology and administration. In selecting new pathologists, employers perceived medical knowledge and interpersonal skills as the most important discriminating applicant characteristics. When new employees were asked why they thought they were offered their position, the discriminating qualifications cited most often were academic background and training, as well as completion of a fellowship and subspecialty training.

CONCLUSIONS

It is our hope that the results of this survey can be used as input for further discussions and recommendations for training of pathology residents so as to further advance the ability of pathologists to provide quality patient care upon their graduation from training.

Informed evaluation of pathology residency programs

OBJECTIVES

To identify resources and summarize important issues in anatomic and clinical pathology training and to assist the pathology resident candidate in evaluating potential training programs.

DATA SOURCES

Published guides for medical residency applicants, recent literature discussing pathology education, and World Wide Web sites.

STUDY SELECTION

Resources perceived by the author as valuable for the pathology resident candidate.

DATA EXTRACTION

Key issues in pathology education are identified.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Issues are discussed from the perspective of a pathology resident candidate, and resources for further information are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The pathology residency candidate faces unique challenges in the residency search process because of the breadth of pathology training and the limited exposure to the practice of pathology in medical school. General guides for residency applicants include little discussion of pathology-specific issues. Recent literature discussing pathology education is fragmented but provides invaluable insights for resident candidates. This review seeks to identify a wide variety of issues and resources as a starting point for evaluating potential training programs.