- © 2008 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors
Paul Hébert and the CMAJ Editorial-Writing Team appear to be unaware of the current state of Canadian continuing health education.1 Although there is always a need for improvement, the College of Family Physicians of Canada rejects the notion that continuing health education in Canada is “a truly broken system.”1 The editorialists not only selected dated studies and American statistics to support their positions but also ignored the significant changes to Canadian accreditation criteria; by using these revised criteria, existing professional organizations now fulfill many of the roles the editorialists propose for an Institute of Continuing Health Education. Perhaps most disturbingly, by suggesting that most physicians are irresponsible and greedy in their pursuit of opportunities for continuing medical education, the editorialists insulted the majority of Canadian physicians, who conscientiously and ethically pay for a substantive portion of their continuing education.
Both the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada have established standards for efficacious, unbiased continuing education. We have gone well beyond traditional continuing medical education into continuing professional development, which encourages our members to engage in self-assessment, self-reflection and activities that allow us to measure change in the physician's behaviour and the effect of the learning program on their practice. We have introduced and promoted programs that encourage interprofessional education and a team approach to care. Our programs are based on identified needs and our credit systems reward activities that use the most effective educational measures.
We have strict rules governing commercial support that incorporate the CMA's ethical guidelines, and we mandate full disclosure and review of content for bias and balance before a program receives accreditation. In fact, the firewalls for our accredited programs are as rigorous as those of CMAJ.
Footnotes
-
Competing interests: None declared.
REFERENCE
- 1.↵