Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Pediatrics. 2019 Dec;144(6). pii: e20192303. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-2303. Epub 2019 Nov 5.

Pediatrician Perspectives on Feasibility and Acceptability of the MOCA-Peds 2017 Pilot.

Author information

1
The American Board of Pediatrics, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; lleslie@abpeds.org.
2
Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts; and.
3
The American Board of Pediatrics, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
4
RTI International, Durham, North Carolina.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:

The American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) certifies that general and subspecialty pediatricians meet standards of excellence established by their peers, immediately after training and over the course of their careers (ie, Maintenance of Certification [MOC]). In 2015-2016, the ABP developed the Maintenance of Certification Assessment for Pediatrics (MOCA-Peds) as an alternative assessment to the current proctored, closed-book general pediatrics (GP) MOC examination. This article is 1 of a 2-part series examining results from the MOCA-Peds pilot in 2017.

METHODS:

We conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses with 5081 eligible pediatricians who registered to participate in the 2017 pilot; 81.4% (n = 4016) completed a quarter 4 survey and/or end-of-year survey (January 2018) and comprise the analytic sample.

RESULTS:

The majority of pediatricians considered the MOCA-Peds to be feasible and acceptable as an alternative to the proctored MOC GP examination. More than 90% of respondents indicated they would participate in the proposed MOCA-Peds model instead of the examination. Participants also offered recommendations to improve the MOCA-Peds (eg, enhanced focus of questions on outpatient GP, references provided before taking questions); the ABP is carefully considering these as the MOCA-Peds is further refined.

CONCLUSIONS:

Pilot participant feedback in 2017 suggested that the MOCA-Peds could be implemented for GP starting in January 2019, with all 15 subspecialties launched by 2022. Current and future evaluations will continue to explore feasibility, acceptability, and learning and practice change as well as sustainability of participation.

PMID:
31690710
DOI:
10.1542/peds.2019-2303
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Conflict of interest statement

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Drs Leslie and Althouse and Mr Turner are employees of The American Board of Pediatrics (ABP). Drs Dounoucos and Olmsted and Ms Smith are employees of RTI International, an international nonprofit research firm with whom the ABP contracted to conduct this evaluation.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire
Loading ...
Support Center