[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.65.227. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 505
Citations 0
Invited Commentary
February 2016

Making a Difference in Surgery Residency Programs

Author Affiliations
  • 1Surgery & Anesthesiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt and VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville
  • 2Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Division of Gastroenterology, Vanderbilt and VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Nashville
JAMA Surg. 2016;151(2):119. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.3653

“A difference to be a difference must make a difference.”

Gertrude Stein1

With the Institute of Medicine’s recommendation for clinical outcomes-based Medicare graduate medical education funding, a pay-for-performance initiative awaits. The article by Bansal et al,2 titled “Using Patient Outcomes to Evaluate General Surgery Residency Program Performance,” is certainly timely. The authors concluded, “This study demonstrates the feasibility of ranking general surgery residency programs using the outcomes of patients treated by the programs’ graduates. … However, as the rankings differed by the individual measures tested, careful consideration will need to be put into the choice of metrics used in any residency program assessment system.”2

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×