Mary M. Johnston
James Madison University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Mary M. Johnston.
JAMA | 2014
Bradley M. Gray; Jonathan L. Vandergrift; Mary M. Johnston; James D. Reschovsky; Lorna A. Lynn; Eric S. Holmboe; Jeffrey S. McCullough; Rebecca S. Lipner
IMPORTANCE In 1990, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) ended lifelong certification by initiating a 10-year Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program that first took effect in 2000. Despite the importance of this change, there has been limited research examining associations between the MOC requirement and patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE To measure associations between the original ABIM MOC requirement and outcomes of care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Quasi-experimental comparison between outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries treated in 2001 by 2 groups of ABIM-certified internal medicine physicians (general internists). One group (n = 956), initially certified in 1991, was required to fulfill the MOC program in 2001 (MOC-required) and treated 84 215 beneficiaries in the sample; the other group (n = 974), initially certified in 1989, was grandfathered out of the MOC requirement (MOC-grandfathered) and treated 69 830 similar beneficiaries in the sample. We compared differences in outcomes for the beneficiary cohort treated by the MOC-required general internists before (1999-2000) and after (2002-2005) they were required to complete MOC, using the beneficiary cohort treated by the MOC-grandfathered general internists as the control. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Quality measures were ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations (ACSHs), measured using prevention quality indicators. Ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations are hospitalizations triggered by conditions thought to be potentially preventable through better access to and quality of outpatient care. Other outcomes included health care cost measures (adjusted to 2013 dollars). RESULTS Annual incidence of ACSHs (per 1000 beneficiaries) increased from the pre-MOC period (37.9 for MOC-required beneficiaries vs 37.0 for MOC-grandfathered beneficiaries) to the post-MOC period (61.8 for MOC-required beneficiaries vs 61.4 for MOC-grandfathered beneficiaries) for both cohorts, as did annual per-beneficiary health care costs (pre-MOC period,
Academic Medicine | 2013
Marcia L. Winward; Rebecca S. Lipner; Mary M. Johnston; Monica M. Cuddy; Brian E. Clauser
5157 for MOC-required beneficiaries vs
Academic Medicine | 2016
Monica M. Cuddy; Marcia L. Winward; Mary M. Johnston; Rebecca S. Lipner; Brian E. Clauser
5133 for MOC-grandfathered beneficiaries; post-MOC period,
Numeracy | 2015
John D. Hathcoat; Donna L. Sundre; Mary M. Johnston
7633 for MOC-required beneficiaries vs
Contemporary Educational Psychology | 2010
Mary M. Johnston; Sara J. Finney
7793 for MOC-grandfathered beneficiaries). The MOC requirement was not statistically associated with cohort differences in the growth of the annual ACSH rate (per 1000 beneficiaries, 0.1 [95% CI, -1.7 to 1.9]; P = .92), but was associated with a cohort difference in the annual, per-beneficiary cost growth of -
JAMA Internal Medicine | 2014
Brenda E. Sirovich; Rebecca S. Lipner; Mary M. Johnston; Eric S. Holmboe
167 (95% CI, -
Learning and Individual Differences | 2018
Sara J. Finney; Carol L. Barry; S. Jeanne Horst; Mary M. Johnston
270.5 to -
Archive | 2014
E. M Pyburn; Mary M. Johnston; S. Jeanne Horst; J. Hathcoat
63.5; P = .002; 2.5% of overall mean cost). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE Imposition of the MOC requirement was not associated with a difference in the increase in ACSHs but was associated with a small reduction in the growth differences of costs for a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries.
Mathematica Policy Research Reports | 2014
Bradley M. Gray; Jonathan L. Vandergrift; Mary M. Johnston; James D. Reschovsky; Lorna A. Lynn; Eric S. Holmboe; Jeffrey S. McCullough; Rebecca S. Lipner
Purpose This study extends available evidence about the relationship between scores on the Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) component of the United States Medical Licensing Examination and subsequent performance in residency. It focuses on the relationship between Step 2 CS communication and interpersonal skills scores and communication skills ratings that residency directors assign to residents in their first postgraduate year of internal medicine training. It represents the first large-scale evaluation of the extent to which Step 2 CS communication and interpersonal skills scores can be extrapolated to examinee performance in supervised practice. Method Hierarchical linear modeling techniques were used to examine the relationships among examinee characteristics, residency program characteristics, and residency-director-provided ratings. The sample comprised 6,306 examinees from 238 internal medicine residency programs who completed Step 2 CS for the first time in 2005 and received ratings during their first year of internal medicine residency training. Results Although the relationship is modest, Step 2 CS communication and interpersonal skills scores predict communication skills ratings for first-year internal medicine residents after accounting for other factors. Conclusions The results of this study make a reasonable case that Step 2 CS communication and interpersonal skills scores provide useful information for predicting the level of communication skill that examinees will display in their first year of internal medicine residency training. This finding demonstrates some level of extrapolation from the testing context to behavior in supervised practice, thus providing validity-related evidence for using Step 2 CS communication and interpersonal skills scores in high-stakes decisions.
Archive | 2009
C. L Barry; Sara J. Finney; Mary M. Johnston; S. Jeanne Horst
Purpose To add to the small body of validity research addressing whether scores from performance assessments of clinical skills are related to performance in supervised patient settings, the authors examined relationships between United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) data gathering and data interpretation scores and subsequent performance in history taking and physical examination in internal medicine residency training. Method The sample included 6,306 examinees from 238 internal medicine residency programs who completed Step 2 CS for the first time in 2005 and whose performance ratings from their first year of residency training were available. Hierarchical linear modeling techniques were used to examine the relationships among Step 2 CS data gathering and data interpretation scores and history-taking and physical examination ratings. Results Step 2 CS data interpretation scores were positively related to both history-taking and physical examination ratings. Step 2 CS data gathering scores were not related to either history-taking or physical examination ratings after other USMLE scores were taken into account. Conclusions Step 2 CS data interpretation scores provide useful information for predicting subsequent performance in history taking and physical examination in supervised practice and thus provide validity evidence for their intended use as an indication of readiness to enter supervised practice. The results show that there is less evidence to support the usefulness of Step 2 CS data gathering scores. This study provides important information for practitioners interested in Step 2 CS specifically or in performance assessments of medical students’ clinical skills more generally.