Identifying educationally influential specialists: Issues arising from the use of "classic" criteria

• Published in: The Journal of continuing education in the health professions Vol. 24; no. 4; pp. 213 - 226
• Main Authors: Wright, Frances C., Ryan, David P., Dodge, Jason E., Last, Linda D., Law, Calvin H. L., Smith, Andrew J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Birmingham Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 2004; John Wiley & Sons, Inc
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cohort Studies; Colorectal Neoplasms - therapy; Continuing medical education; continuing professional development; Education, Medical, Continuing - statistics & numerical data; educationally influential physician; Female; Foreign Countries; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Intelligent Tutoring Systems; Interprofessional Relations; knowledge transfer; Leadership; Male; Medical Education; Middle Aged; Ontario; opinion leader; Pathology; Physician's Role; Physicians; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data; specialist physicians; Surgery; Surveys and Questionnaires; Transfer Programs; Canada; Ontario
• ISSN: 0894-1912; 1554-558X
• DOI: 10.1002/chp.1340240405

Introduction: Educationally influential physicians (EIPs) are identified by their colleagues as people who (1) encourage learning and enjoy sharing their knowledge, (2) are clinical experts and always seem up to date, and (3) treat others as equals. We aimed to identify surgical and pathologist EIPs for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario as part of a blended knowledge transfer program. Methods: A population‐based cohort of surgeons (n = 794) and pathologists (n = 449) were sent surveys modeled on the Hiss method for identifying EIPs. Four formal mailings (including incentives) and telephone calls and faxes were completed. This labor‐intensive process identified “general” EIPs and surgery or pathology EIPs for CRC. The characteristics of EIPs in these groups were studied. Results: The response rate was 41% for surgeons and 42% for pathologists. One hundred eighteen general EIPs were identified and substantially more surgical EIPs for CRC (n = 63) than pathology EIPs for CRC (n = 6) were recognized. Forty‐two of 81 medical centers in Ontario identified an EIP. We also identified a cohort of “domain experts,” physicians whose opinion was valued for CRC but who did not meet the Hiss EIP criteria. This cohort of “domain experts” was larger than the cohort of EIPs for CRC for both surgeons (63 vs. 154) and pathologists (6 vs. 154). Discussion: In this population study, we identified EIPs for CRC using the Hiss method, although significantly more surgical than pathology EIPs for CRC were recognized. The educational influence of domain experts who do not fulfill the Hiss characteristics compared with EIPs for CRC remains to be determined.