Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2237-8309
Structure and Funding of Clinical Informatics Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors
Funding This study was supported in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) under the University of California, Los Angeles Clinical and Translational Science Institute grant number UL1TR001881 and the University of Texas Southwestern Clinical and Translational Science Award grant number UL1TR003163.Abstract
Background In 2011, the American Board of Medical Specialties established clinical informatics (CI) as a subspecialty in medicine, jointly administered by the American Board of Pathology and the American Board of Preventive Medicine. Subsequently, many institutions created CI fellowship training programs to meet the growing need for informaticists. Although many programs share similar features, there is considerable variation in program funding and administrative structures.
Objectives The aim of our study was to characterize CI fellowship program features, including governance structures, funding sources, and expenses.
Methods We created a cross-sectional online REDCap survey with 44 items requesting information on program administration, fellows, administrative support, funding sources, and expenses. We surveyed program directors of programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education between 2014 and 2021.
Results We invited 54 program directors, of which 41 (76%) completed the survey. The average administrative support received was $27,732/year. Most programs (85.4%) were accredited to have two or more fellows per year. Programs were administratively housed under six departments: Internal Medicine (17; 41.5%), Pediatrics (7; 17.1%), Pathology (6; 14.6%), Family Medicine (6; 14.6%), Emergency Medicine (4; 9.8%), and Anesthesiology (1; 2.4%). Funding sources for CI fellowship program directors included: hospital or health systems (28.3%), clinical departments (28.3%), graduate medical education office (13.2%), biomedical informatics department (9.4%), hospital information technology (9.4%), research and grants (7.5%), and other sources (3.8%) that included philanthropy and external entities.
Conclusion CI fellowships have been established in leading academic and community health care systems across the country. Due to their unique training requirements, these programs require significant resources for education, administration, and recruitment. There continues to be considerable heterogeneity in funding models between programs. Our survey findings reinforce the need for reformed federal funding models for informatics practice and training.
Keywords
clinical informatics - physician - workforce - ACGME - fellowships and scholarships - internships and residency - medical informaticsPublication History
Received: 26 September 2023
Accepted: 02 January 2024
Accepted Manuscript online:
03 January 2024
Article published online:
21 February 2024
© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Kannry J, Sengstack P, Thyvalikakath TP. et al. The Chief Clinical Informatics Officer (CCIO): AMIA Task Force report on CCIO knowledge, education, and skillset requirements. Appl Clin Inform 2016; 7 (01) 143-176
- 2 Safran C, Shabot MM, Munger BS. et al; AMIA Board of Directors. Program requirements for fellowship education in the subspecialty of clinical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009; 16 (02) 158-166
- 3 Lehmann CU, Gundlapalli AV, Williamson JJ. et al. Five Years of Clinical Informatics Board Certification for Physicians in the United States of America. Yearb Med Inform 2018; 27 (01) 237-242
- 4 Longhurst CA, Pageler NM, Palma JP. et al. Early experiences of accredited clinical informatics fellowships. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016; 23 (04) 829-834
- 5 Desai S, Mostaghimi A, Nambudiri VE. Clinical informatics subspecialists: characterizing a novel evolving workforce. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (11) 1711-1715
- 6 Lehmann CU, Longhurst CA, Hersh W. et al. Clinical Informatics Fellowship Programs: In search of a viable financial model: an open letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Appl Clin Inform 2015; 6 (02) 267-270
- 7 Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL. et al; REDCap Consortium. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform 2019; 95: 103208
- 8 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
- 9 ACGME Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Clinical Informatics. Accessed November 01, 2023 at: https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/pfassets/programrequirements/381_clinicalinformatics_2023.pdf
- 10 Palma JP, Hron JD, Luberti AA. Early experiences with combined fellowship training in clinical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (05) 788-792
- 11 Bell DS, Baldwin K, Bell EJ. et al. Characteristics of the National Applicant Pool for Clinical Informatics Fellowships (2016–2017). AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2018; 2018: 225-231
- 12 Kim E, Van Cain M, Hron J. Survey of clinical informatics fellows graduating 2016-2024: experiences before and during fellowship. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2023; 30 (10) 1608-1613
- 13 Kannry J, Smith J, Mohan V, Levy B, Finnell J, Lehmann CU. Clinical Informatics Program Directors Group-AMIA. Policy statement on clinical informatics fellowships and the future of informatics-driven medicine. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (05) 710-713
- 14 Bichel-Findlay J, Koch S, Mantas J. et al. Recommendations of the international medical informatics association (IMIA) on education in biomedical and health informatics: second revision. Int J Med Inform 2023; 170: 104908
- 15 Fridsma DB. Developing the health informatics workforce of the future: academic and industry partners. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (03) 677-678
- 16 Turer RW, Levy BP, Hron JD. et al. An open letter arguing for closure of the practice pathway for clinical informatics medical subspecialty certification. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (01) 301-303
- 17 Johnson R. The American Board of Pathology examiner. 2016 Accessed January 25, 2024 at: https://abpath.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2016_ABPExaminer.pdf/
- 18 Hersh WR. The clinical informatics practice pathway should be maintained for now but transformed into an alternative to in-place fellowships. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (02) 398-399
- 19 Henricks WH, Karcher DS, Harrison Jr JH. et al. Pathology informatics essentials for residents: a flexible informatics curriculum linked to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education milestones. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2017; 141 (01) 113-124
- 20 Payne TH. The value of medical informatics expertise to health care organizations. Ann Saudi Med 1995; 15 (03) 203-204
- 21 Zhao J, Forsythe R, Langerman A, Melton GB, Schneider DF, Jackson GP. The value of the surgeon informatician. J Surg Res 2020; 252: 264-271
- 22 Nundy S, Cooper LA, Mate KS. The quintuple aim for health care improvement: a new imperative to advance health equity. JAMA 2022; 327 (06) 521-522