Designing an evaluation framework for WFME basic standards for medical education

<b>Purpose</b>: To create an evaluation plan for the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) accreditation standards for basic medical education. <b>Methods</b>: We conceptualized the 100 basic standards from “Basic Medical Education: WFME Global Standards for Quality Improvement: The 2012 Revision” as medical education program objectives. Standards were simplified into evaluable items, which were then categorized as inputs, processes, outputs and/or outcomes to generate a logic model and corresponding plan for data collection. <b>Results</b>: WFME standards posed significant challenges to evaluation due to complex wording, inconsistent formatting and lack of existing assessment tools. Our resulting logic model contained 244 items. Standard B 5.1.1 separated into 24 items, the most for any single standard. A large proportion of items (40%) required evaluation of more than one input, process, output and/or outcome. Only one standard (B 3.2.2) was interpreted as requiring evaluation of a program outcome. <b>Conclusions</b>: Current WFME standards are difficult to use for evaluation planning. Our analysis may guide adaptation and revision of standards to make them more evaluable. Our logic model and data collection plan may be useful to medical schools planning an institutional self-review and to accrediting authorities wanting to provide guidance to schools under their purview.

【研究目的】为世界医学教育联合会（World Federation for Medical Education, WFME）的基础医学教育认证标准制定一套评估方案。
【研究方法】我们将《基础医学教育：WFME质量改进全球标准：2012年修订版》中的100项基础认证标准，界定为医学教育项目的核心评估目标。随后将这些标准简化为可评估条目，并按照投入（input）、过程（process）、产出（output）与结果（outcome）进行分类，以此构建逻辑模型并制定配套的数据收集方案。
【研究结果】WFME认证标准因措辞繁复、格式不统一且缺乏现成的评估工具，给评估工作带来了极大挑战。本次研究构建的逻辑模型共包含244个评估条目。其中标准B 5.1.1被拆解为24个条目，为所有单一标准中拆解条目最多的一项。有较大比例（40%）的条目需要同时对一项以上的投入、过程、产出及结果进行评估。仅有一项标准（B 3.2.2）被判定为需要对项目整体结果进行评估。
【研究结论】现行WFME认证标准难以直接用于评估方案制定。本研究的分析结果可为认证标准的优化与修订提供参考，使其更具可评估性。本研究构建的逻辑模型与数据收集方案，可为计划开展机构自评的医学院校，以及希望为管辖范围内院校提供评估指导的认证机构提供参考价值。