Beyond self-interest. Professional advocacy and the integration of theory, research, and practice.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to M F Shore.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The public and private sectors will both be forced to change as they forge new relationships in order to manage the Medicaid benefit. These changes will affect both their organizational cultures and their technical capabilities.
The RWJF Program on Chronic Mental illness created centralized mental health authorities in nine cities as a demonstration project. Evaluation teams, selected after the project began, and a national program office, established to provide technical assistance and to communicate progress and results, worked in tandem with the program staff. The project was evaluated as "logic model" to determine the feasibility of centralized authorities and to estimate their effect on various outcomes. One finding was that service reorganization does not cancel out the need to supply funds or mental health care. The problems of delay in the publication of results and of public officials' reluctance to act without "definitive" research data are described, as are the remedies for these difficulties.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: The American College of Psychiatrists conducted research to validate the content outline of the Psychiatry Resident In-Training Examination (PRITE) and to assess what residency training directors think about the examination. METHOD: A mail survey was sent to the 218 psychiatry residency training directors who subscribe to the PRITE. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 70%. A majority of the respondents indicated agreement with the relative emphasis given to each content area in the PRITE (range = 52%-80% agreement). Eighty-one percent of the respondents were strongly in favor of continuing the practice of releasing the examination and the correct responses each year after the examinations have been scored. The majority of the respondents use results on the PRITE for individual resident evaluation and program evaluation (90% and 94%, respectively). Very few respondents use the PRITE results as the sole measure for assessing residents' cognitive competence or use it for marketing their residency programs. CONCLUSIONS: The survey provided strong support for the content areas covered in the PRITE and their relative emphases. The current practice of releasing PRITE items and answers (a main difference between the PRITE and the certification examination of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology) was well supported by the survey results. The stated purpose of the PRITE, to provide educationally useful feedback for individuals and groups in the form of comparisons with peers in specific areas of knowledge, was supported by a large majority of the respondents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.