Accreditation of graduate medical education in radiology. Historic perspectives

Initially, accreditation represented a somewhat informal and voluntary relationship between the AMA Council on Medical Education and Hospitals and representatives of the specialty board organizations to jointly survey hospitals where training programs were conducted. In recent years, changes in public policy and the law, and the greater involvement of governmental agencies have institutionalized accrediting decisions as a consideration in noneducational actions such as funding. The accreditation process today has an indirect but important influence upon regulatory activities carried out by governmental agencies; accreditation has thus been transformed, by governmental action, into a public service performed by quasipublic agencies. In order to reconcile educational and professional objectives with present-day societal needs, certain standards must be followed. Accreditation must have autonomy to function independent of political or economic influence and must be impartial and free to act without actual or apparent conflicts of interest. Those involved in the review process must be highly knowledgeable and respected in their own discipline and should be trained in the work of the accrediting agency. The decision-making process must be formal, uniform, and consistent with public standards and procedures that are available to all interested parties. All parties directly affected by the accreditation decision must have the opportunity to present their views under due process. In a separate but related issue, the United States Congress, third-party carriers, and perceptive leaders of the medical education establishment are presently reviewing critically the funding of graduate medical education.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)