ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Thomas B. Ferguson
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferguson, T. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferguson, T. B.

Ann Thorac Surg 1977;24:6-18
© 1977 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Articles

Guilds, Boards, and Hobgoblins

Thomas B. Ferguson, M.D.

From the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Suite 6106, Queeny Tower, 4989 Barnes Hospital Plaza, St Louis, MO 63110

The American specialty board system is viewed in the historical perspective of a quest for quality assessment of surgical trainees. Beginning with the American Board for Ophthalmic Examinations in 1916, a system of 22 boards has developed which, by their training requirements and examinations, essentially dictate the length and content of all postgraduate educational programs.

The time has come for the boards, as a powerful force in postgraduate education and in organized medicine, to reassess their position and to be sensitive to the responsibilities they have for the future. The events of history suggest six changes that might be profitable. (1) Recognize their purpose to be broader than the administration of certifying examinations. (2) Recognize that the certificate is now a license, and deal squarely with this issue. (3) Initiate and support needed medical reforms while the private sector can still do so. (4) Assume a leadership role in the shaping and future direction of graduate medical education. (5) Relinquish a degree of autonomy in order to strengthen the American Board of Medical Specialties. (6) Define their place in the medical scene and reorganize their board structures accordingly.

The primary responsibility of the boards should be to make certain all aspects of resident training in approved programs are sound. Long-range goals should be the elimination of the certifying examination, and public recognition and approval of specialty status attainment.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
B. R. Wilcox
A half-dead thing...?
Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 1995; 59(5): 1047 - 1055.
[PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
W. G. Rainer
Profiles of leadership in thoracic surgery
Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 1991; 51(6): 877 - 881.
[PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
J. L. Ankeney
Assurance
Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 1981; 32(3): 222 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 1977 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.