S A E M
Newsletter of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine May/June 2005 Volume XVII, Number 3
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
901 N. Washington Ave. Lansing, MI 48906-5137 (517) 485-5484 saem@saem.org www.saem.org
Grant Writing Mentorship Initiative
The True Revolution in Medical Education My previous President’s Message examined the current state of flux in the medical education system, with an appeal that we consider applying the scientific method a bit more liberally before enacting such widespread process change. Perhaps we are partially at fault through a relative Carey Chisholm, MD lack of outcomes data examining exactly how well our graduates perform, and how we (EM) collectively affect patient outcomes. There has been a very promising growth of EM multi-center studies, many with our members as PIs, that will shed further light in the future. The process of education has become the scapegoat, yet in the flurry of activity towards outcomes there is danger in losing sight of the fact that process ultimately determines much of the outcome. In reality the component that was truly broken within medical education was process documentation. For the EM residency graduate, perhaps we can share some of the blame since we as a specialty have never clearly and concisely articulated what the “outcome” should be. I realize that the Core Content1-2, replaced by the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine3 (“The Model”), have attempted to define the specialty of Emergency Medicine and its practitioners’ knowledge and skills sets. Unfortunately, “The Model” is overly complex (if you don’t believe this, simply ask your faculty colleagues, or your graduates how they use this, or even if they can explain what it is). The recent integration of the core competencies have added an additional component.4 The EM community instead needs to step back, look at the end product, define the crucial skill sets of a competent emergency physician, and work backwards from there. Residency curricula (process) should be disproportionately weighted to assure that all graduates meet these crucial skill sets. The required outcomes assessment would be derived from these as well. And this shouldn’t be made more difficult than it has to be. A recent internal survey conducted of Indiana University housestaff revealed that paperwork and administrative requirements (the most frequently cited was mandated workhours reporting forms!) were believed to be the largest source of stress during training! It would appear that the “process” is interfering with the desired “outcomes”. On the CORD list-serv a recently circulated example of a chief complaint (chest pain) teaching/assessment process was reported as being very favorably received by the program’s RRC site reviewer. This was an elaborate and eloquent multi-paged document that
(continued on page 45)
Call for Grant Applications Deadline: April 27, 2005 James Olson, PhD Gary B. Green, MD, MPH Richard E. Rothman, MD, PhD Mark Angelos, MD for the SAEM Research Committee Call for Grant Applications: We are seeking submissions of any nonfunded or complete but yet-to-be submitted grant applications from EM faculty or fellows. Those who submitted grant applications to SAEM or EMF but were not funded, as well as unfunded or K award applicantions in progress are encouraged. Those who submit an application can expect to receive detailed (verbal) feedback and constructive criticism that will strengthen their application and increase chances for future funding, as well as an opportunity to directly interact with a successful, experienced grant reviewer and/or grant writer and principal investigator. To the extent possible, applications will be paired with expert reviewers according to the type of submission and the subject matter. Applicants should submit their grant application, including face sheets, abstract, hypotheses, specific aims, previous work, methods, and experimental design as well as copies of any previous reviews (“pink sheets”). A cover letter should be included that briefly details the application’s history of submission and deadline for resubmission. Although the service may be further expanded in the future, at present, applicants must attend the SAEM Annual Meeting in order to participate in the grant writing mentoring initiative. Applicants should submit their materials electronically possible to saem@saem.org by April 27, 2005. For questions contact James Olson, at: (937) 395-8839 or james.olson@wright.edu. One of the major goals of the SAEM Research Committee is to help the membership identify and gain access to the knowledge and skills needed to launch successful academic careers. It is clear that obtaining independent research funding through NIH, CDC, or other agency is often a major stepping stone on the path towards a successful research career as well as a common “bottleneck” in emergency medicine academic career development. Recognizing this, the Research Committee has undertaken several projects to aid the membership in developing grantsmanship skills. These efforts have included the development of a series of educational sessions at each of the past few SAEM Annual Meetings, as well as ongoing development of a grant writing mentorship initiative. The mentorship project was started by the Research Committee four years ago with the dual goals of “providing a mechanism to assist in the review of grant applications written by SAEM members,” as well as the “creation of an annual forum where successful and aspiring grant writers could (continued on page 2)
“to improve patient care by advancing research and education in emergency medicine”