A Competency Framework for Health Research Ethics Educational Programs: Results from a Stakeholder-Driven Mixed-Method Process.

Educational programs are integral to building health research ethics (HRE) capacity, but no outcomes framework exists to guide them. We empirically developed a competency framework for health research ethics education-the Framework for Research Ethics Studies Competencies and Outcomes (FRESCO)-using mixed methods, including group concept mapping and a survey of international experts. FRESCO includes seven competency domains: (1) Foundational Knowledge; (2) Laws, Regulations, Guidelines, and Policies for Research Oversight; (3) Ethical-Issue Identification, Analysis, and Resolution; (4) Engagement, Communication, and Advocacy; (5) Lifelong Learning, Education, Research, and Scholarship; (6) Coordination, Stewardship, and Responsiveness in HRE Systems; and (7) Impartiality, Honesty, and Responsibility. These domains are detailed in 27 subdomains. Survey respondents rated FRESCO's relevance to HRE highly. FRESCO can be adapted and implemented in educational programs to refine recruitment and selection processes, educational and assessment methods, and performance measures to ensure that HRE educational programs have their intended effects.

The Status of Family Medicine Training Programs in the Asia Pacific.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The family medicine training programs in the Asia Pacific (AP) are evolving. To date, there is a lack of comprehensive and systematic documentation on the status of family medicine training in the AP. This study aims to determine the status of family medicine training at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels in medical schools (universities or colleges) in the AP. METHODS: In 2014, the authors conducted a cross-sectional online survey to assess the undergraduate and postgraduate family medicine programs in academic family medicine departments from AP countries. A 37-item online survey questionnaire was sent to key informants from academic institutions with established family medicine departments/units. Only one response from each family medicine department/unit was included in the analysis. RESULTS: The medical school and country response rates were 31.31% and 64.1%, respectively. The majority of the medical schools (94.7%, n=71/75) reported having a department/unit for family medicine. Family medicine is recognized as a specialist degree by the governments of 20/25 countries studied. Family medicine is included in the undergraduate program of 92% (n=69/75) of all the participating medical schools. Only slightly more than half (53.3%) (n=40/75) reported conducting a postgraduate clinical program. Less than one third (26.7%) (n=20/75) of the medical schools conducted postgraduate research programs. CONCLUSIONS: Undergraduate training remains the focus of most family medicine departments/units in the AP. Nevertheless, the number of postgraduate programs is increasing. A more rigorous and long-term documentation of family medicine training in the AP is warranted.