Recertification. A continuing debate

Jonathan D. Trobe, Melvin L. Rubin, Sidney M. Wolfe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Recertification, like taxes, will never draw many supporters from the targeted group. Why should physicians who have had to survive the stiffest of scholastic labors in order to obtain the privilege of a medical education again be asked to prove their continuing worth long after graduation? Apparently because health consumers feel that physicians occupy a critical role and want more tangible evidence that they are keeping up with the explosion of medical knowledge. Dr. Trobe has sought the opinion of Dr. Melvin Rubin, who challenges the assumption that a recertification test will offer a sufficient guarantee of clinical excellence to warrant the expense to the public and the "mental anguish" to physicians, and the opinion of Dr. Sidney Wolfe, who argues that examination is a necessary (though perhaps not sufficient) protection against flagging knowledge and skill.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)249-254
Number of pages6
JournalSurvey of ophthalmology
Volume24
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1980

Keywords

  • medical education
  • recertification

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Recertification. A continuing debate'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Trobe, J. D., Rubin, M. L., & Wolfe, S. M. (1980). Recertification. A continuing debate. Survey of ophthalmology, 24(4), 249-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-6257(80)90046-6