Annals of Epidemiology 25 (2015) 466e468
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Annals of Epidemiology journal homepage: www.annalsofepidemiology.org
From the American College of Epidemiology
Competencies for master and doctoral students in epidemiology: what is important, what is unimportant, and where is there room for improvement? Larissa R. Brunner Huber PhD a, *, Kristopher Fennie PhD b, Holly Patterson MSPH a, c a b c
Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Health and Human Services, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte Department of Epidemiology, Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University, Miami Project Management Office, PRA Health Sciences, Raleigh
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 22 February 2015 Accepted 8 March 2015 Available online 14 March 2015
In 2008, members of the American College of Epidemiology’s Education Committee began work on a project to facilitate discussion on identifying domains and core competencies for epidemiologic training at the master and doctoral levels. Two online surveys were created and participants (N ¼ 183; n ¼ 147 [established epidemiologists] and n ¼ 36 [recent graduates]) rated the importance of 19 domains and 66 competencies. A total of 17 competencies were viewed as important or very important for individuals earning various master- or doctoral-level degrees in epidemiology, whereas eight competencies were reported as being unimportant for all individuals earning graduate degrees in epidemiology. Twenty additional competencies were viewed as important or very important only for individuals receiving doctoral training. In addition, recent master-level graduates identified nine domains in which they felt less prepared, and recent doctoral-level graduates identified two such domains. Additional research is warranted to ensure that all epidemiologists receive sufficient training in identified areas. Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Competencies Graduate training Epidemiology
Introduction In recent years, there has been interest in developing competencies for a range of fields, including medicine and public health. These competencies are viewed as essential skills that all people in a given field should be able to perform. Prior efforts by the American College of Epidemiology (ACE), the Association of Schools of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) have identified various domains and competencies important to epidemiologic training [1e4]. Although there have been considerable efforts in identifying these domains and competencies, some gaps still exist. For example, at the master’s level, competencies exist only for those individuals who have received an MPH degree. Thus, it is unclear whether these same competencies should be used for individuals receiving either an MSPH or an MS in epidemiology. Although competencies have been derived for doctoral-level epidemiologists working in governmental public health agencies, * Corresponding author. Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Health and Human Services, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223-001. Tel.: þ1-704-687-8719; fax: þ1-704-687-6122. E-mail address: [email protected] (L.R. Brunner Huber). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.03.001 1047-2797/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
there has been limited discussion on whether there are additional competencies necessary for an individual interested in working in an academic or private research institution.
ACE survey on competencies Survey development and content In 2008, members of the ACE’s Education Committee began work on a project to facilitate discussion on identifying domains and core competencies for epidemiologic training at both the master’s and doctoral levels. Two online surveys were created for this project and pretested in a group of Education Committee members. The first survey targeted established epidemiologists and collected basic demographic information as well as information on the participant’s current job. After this brief section, the survey then concentrated on identifying important domains and competencies for epidemiologic training using information from the previous efforts of ACE, the Association of Schools of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. Specifically, a total of 19 domains and 66 competencies were identified from
L.R. Brunner Huber et al. / Annals of Epidemiology 25 (2015) 466e468
these previous efforts leading up to 2008. All of these domains were listed on the survey along with brief descriptions when the meaning of a domain was not evident from its name. Participants were asked to indicate whether the domain is important for each of the master (i.e., MPH, MS, and MSPH) and doctoral degrees (i.e., PhD, ScD, and DrPH) using a five-point scale (i.e., strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree). If a participant marked “strongly agree” or “agree” for a domain, he or she was asked about competencies for that particular domain and whether the skills identified were necessary for all professional settings (i.e., academic, hospital, research, and government settings). If a participant did not mark “strongly agree” or “agree” for a particular domain, he or she was automatically skipped to the next domain. The survey concluded with an open-ended section where participants could list other domains and/or competencies they considered important to master- and/or doctoral-level training. A second survey was given to recent master and doctoral graduates (i.e., 3e5 years postgraduation) to assess their viewpoints on epidemiologic training. This survey was similar to the one administered to established epidemiologists. Participants completed a brief demographic section that also collected information on their current employment. The previously identified domains and competencies were listed and, using a similar five-point scale indicating level of importance, participants were asked to rate how important each domain and competency has been to them since they have completed their degrees and started working. The survey concluded with an open-ended section where recent graduates could list additional skills they would have liked to acquire during their education. Survey administration ACE office staff assisted the Education Committee by identifying a sample of current ACE members, fellows, emeriti, and honorary fellows to contact regarding the established epidemiologist survey. ACE records also identified recent doctoral graduates from the member list and recent master-level graduates from the associate member list. Because of the small pool of eligible participants for the recent graduate survey, we also contacted student groups such as the Society for Epidemiologic Research Student Caucus and individual student organizations at universities to assist us in identifying recent graduates. Once the two samples were identified, ACE office staff sent potential participants an introductory e-mail inviting them to participate in the survey. In addition to explaining the purpose of the survey, the e-mail contained a link to the online survey. Data collection took place from March to May 2009, and the study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
467
Table 1 Competencies viewed as important or very important for individuals earning MS, MSPH, MPH, PhD, ScD, or DrPH degrees in epidemiology Identifying public health problems pertinent to the population; describing the population by race or ethnicity; culture; societal, educational, and professional backgrounds; age; gender; religion; disability; and sexual orientation Applying principles of good ethical and legal practice as they relate to study design and data collection, dissemination, and use; understanding the concepts of human subjects protections and confidentiality and awareness of particular issues relevant to the study of specific populations Managing data from surveillance, investigations, or other sources Analyzing data from an epidemiologic investigation or study; presenting research data in both tabular and figure forms Summarizing results of the analysis and drawing conclusions Using effective communication technologies Producing the descriptive epidemiology of a given condition, including case definition, calculation of the primary measures of disease morbidity and mortality, and appropriate comparisons by person, place and time; listing the strengths and limitations of descriptive statistics Identifying data from existing national and international sources Identifying leading causes of death Knowing the principles of screening and of surveillance systems, including understanding the concepts of validity and reliability of screening tests and being able to calculate associated measures and knowing the types of surveillance systems and approaches used in disease surveillance Searching the literature; reviewing and critically evaluating the literature; synthesizing available information
A total of 17 competencies were viewed as important or very important for individuals earning various master- or doctorallevel degrees in epidemiology (Table 1), whereas eight competencies were reported as being unimportant for all individuals earning graduate degrees in epidemiology (Table 2). Twenty additional competencies were viewed as important or very important only for individuals receiving doctoral training. Examples include the following: designing surveillance systems, assisting in the preparation of proposals for extramural funding, identifying major gaps in knowledge, formulating original hypotheses, designing a study, identifying and minimizing sources of bias, using methods of measurement, calculating sample size, and examining data for the presence of confounding or interaction. There were numerous discrepancies in rating the importance of competencies for individuals receiving various master-level degrees. For example, interpreting and recognizing implications of research results was viewed as important for individuals with MPH degrees but not for individuals with MSPH or MS degrees. Conversely, providing epidemiologic input into studies, public health programs, or community public health planning processes was regarded as important for individuals with MS degrees but not for those with MPH or MSPH degrees. In addition, recent master-level graduates identified nine domains in which they felt less prepared and recent doctoral-level graduates identified two such domains (Table 3).
Survey results A total of 183 individuals participated in the surveys (n ¼ 147 [established epidemiologist survey], n ¼ 36 [recent graduate survey]). Most of the established epidemiologist respondents were between the ages of 56 to 65 years (32.7%) and male (57.1%). Nearly 40% reported currently working in an academic setting. The remaining participants worked in the following settings: government (15.6%), hospital (12.9%), private or research (8.2%), other (20.4%), and unknown (1.4%). Recent graduates were predominantly less than 35 years of age (58.3%) and female (69.4%). Half currently worked in an academic setting, whereas 13.9% worked in a hospital, 33.3% in the private or research sector, and 2.8% did not report their current employment.
Table 2 Competencies viewed as unimportant for individuals earning MS, MSPH, MPH, PhD, ScD, or DrPH degrees in epidemiology Evaluating programs Using laboratory resources to support epidemiologic activities Establishing relationships with groups of special concern Implementing operational and financial plans Promoting the organization’s vision in all programs and activities Using performance measures to evaluate and improve epidemiology program effectiveness Promoting workforce development Preparing for emergency response
468
L.R. Brunner Huber et al. / Annals of Epidemiology 25 (2015) 466e468
Data collection and monitoring (MS, MSPH) Study design (MSPH) Data management (MS, MSPH) Data analysis (MSPH)
Brownson and Jon Samet, spearheaded a committee that examined competencies that will be needed as epidemiology responds to a number of macro trends including big data, health care reform, and translational research. The committee will release a write-up over the next few months. Ultimately, these efforts can help to ensure that all epidemiologists receive sufficient training in identified areas.
Biology (PhD, ScD)
Acknowledgment
Table 3 Domains recent graduates said were important to their current jobs but in which they felt they were not adequately prepared Assessment and analysis (MS, MSPH) Basic Public Health Science (MS, PhD, ScD) Communication (MS, MSPH) Basic knowledge of leading public health problems and history of the discipline (MSPH) Problem conceptualization (MSPH)
Future work and implications Although these survey results provide considerable insight into what competencies are important for individuals receiving graduate training in epidemiology, they also highlight some areas for future consideration. Specifically, more examination of the similarities and differences among MS, MSPH, and MPH degrees and the differing expectations in competencies for these degrees is needed. In addition, exploring how competencies may differ by work setting is warranted. At the 2010 ACE Annual Meeting in San Francisco, results were reported to the Council of Epidemiology Chairs for discussion and at a Luncheon Roundtable Workshop. ACE continues to work on the competencies project. Former ACE Presidents, Ross
This project was supported by the American College of Epidemiology. References [1] Association of Schools of Public Health. ACE/ASPH workshop on doctoral education in epidemiology: workshop summary. Baltimore, MD. 2002. [2] University of Illinois at Chicago. Master’s Degree in Public Health Core Competency Development Project. 2006. Available from: https://www.uic.edu/sph/ prepare/courses/chsc400/syllabus/mphcorecomp.pdf. [accessed 06.2.2015]. [3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC/CSTE Competencies for Applied Epidemiologists in Governmental Public Health Agencies. 2008. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/AppliedEpiCompetencies/. [accessed 06.2.2015]. [4] Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Doctor of Public Health Core Competency Model. 2009. Available from: http://www.aspph.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/04/DrPHVersion1-3.pdf. [accessed 06.2.2015].
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Annals of Epidemiology journal homepage: www.annalsofepidemiology.org
From the American College of Epidemiology
Competencies for master and doctoral students in epidemiology: what is important, what is unimportant, and where is there room for improvement? Larissa R. Brunner Huber PhD a, *, Kristopher Fennie PhD b, Holly Patterson MSPH a, c a b c
Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Health and Human Services, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte Department of Epidemiology, Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University, Miami Project Management Office, PRA Health Sciences, Raleigh
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 22 February 2015 Accepted 8 March 2015 Available online 14 March 2015
In 2008, members of the American College of Epidemiology’s Education Committee began work on a project to facilitate discussion on identifying domains and core competencies for epidemiologic training at the master and doctoral levels. Two online surveys were created and participants (N ¼ 183; n ¼ 147 [established epidemiologists] and n ¼ 36 [recent graduates]) rated the importance of 19 domains and 66 competencies. A total of 17 competencies were viewed as important or very important for individuals earning various master- or doctoral-level degrees in epidemiology, whereas eight competencies were reported as being unimportant for all individuals earning graduate degrees in epidemiology. Twenty additional competencies were viewed as important or very important only for individuals receiving doctoral training. In addition, recent master-level graduates identified nine domains in which they felt less prepared, and recent doctoral-level graduates identified two such domains. Additional research is warranted to ensure that all epidemiologists receive sufficient training in identified areas. Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Competencies Graduate training Epidemiology
Introduction In recent years, there has been interest in developing competencies for a range of fields, including medicine and public health. These competencies are viewed as essential skills that all people in a given field should be able to perform. Prior efforts by the American College of Epidemiology (ACE), the Association of Schools of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) have identified various domains and competencies important to epidemiologic training [1e4]. Although there have been considerable efforts in identifying these domains and competencies, some gaps still exist. For example, at the master’s level, competencies exist only for those individuals who have received an MPH degree. Thus, it is unclear whether these same competencies should be used for individuals receiving either an MSPH or an MS in epidemiology. Although competencies have been derived for doctoral-level epidemiologists working in governmental public health agencies, * Corresponding author. Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Health and Human Services, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223-001. Tel.: þ1-704-687-8719; fax: þ1-704-687-6122. E-mail address: [email protected] (L.R. Brunner Huber). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.03.001 1047-2797/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
there has been limited discussion on whether there are additional competencies necessary for an individual interested in working in an academic or private research institution.
ACE survey on competencies Survey development and content In 2008, members of the ACE’s Education Committee began work on a project to facilitate discussion on identifying domains and core competencies for epidemiologic training at both the master’s and doctoral levels. Two online surveys were created for this project and pretested in a group of Education Committee members. The first survey targeted established epidemiologists and collected basic demographic information as well as information on the participant’s current job. After this brief section, the survey then concentrated on identifying important domains and competencies for epidemiologic training using information from the previous efforts of ACE, the Association of Schools of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. Specifically, a total of 19 domains and 66 competencies were identified from
L.R. Brunner Huber et al. / Annals of Epidemiology 25 (2015) 466e468
these previous efforts leading up to 2008. All of these domains were listed on the survey along with brief descriptions when the meaning of a domain was not evident from its name. Participants were asked to indicate whether the domain is important for each of the master (i.e., MPH, MS, and MSPH) and doctoral degrees (i.e., PhD, ScD, and DrPH) using a five-point scale (i.e., strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree). If a participant marked “strongly agree” or “agree” for a domain, he or she was asked about competencies for that particular domain and whether the skills identified were necessary for all professional settings (i.e., academic, hospital, research, and government settings). If a participant did not mark “strongly agree” or “agree” for a particular domain, he or she was automatically skipped to the next domain. The survey concluded with an open-ended section where participants could list other domains and/or competencies they considered important to master- and/or doctoral-level training. A second survey was given to recent master and doctoral graduates (i.e., 3e5 years postgraduation) to assess their viewpoints on epidemiologic training. This survey was similar to the one administered to established epidemiologists. Participants completed a brief demographic section that also collected information on their current employment. The previously identified domains and competencies were listed and, using a similar five-point scale indicating level of importance, participants were asked to rate how important each domain and competency has been to them since they have completed their degrees and started working. The survey concluded with an open-ended section where recent graduates could list additional skills they would have liked to acquire during their education. Survey administration ACE office staff assisted the Education Committee by identifying a sample of current ACE members, fellows, emeriti, and honorary fellows to contact regarding the established epidemiologist survey. ACE records also identified recent doctoral graduates from the member list and recent master-level graduates from the associate member list. Because of the small pool of eligible participants for the recent graduate survey, we also contacted student groups such as the Society for Epidemiologic Research Student Caucus and individual student organizations at universities to assist us in identifying recent graduates. Once the two samples were identified, ACE office staff sent potential participants an introductory e-mail inviting them to participate in the survey. In addition to explaining the purpose of the survey, the e-mail contained a link to the online survey. Data collection took place from March to May 2009, and the study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
467
Table 1 Competencies viewed as important or very important for individuals earning MS, MSPH, MPH, PhD, ScD, or DrPH degrees in epidemiology Identifying public health problems pertinent to the population; describing the population by race or ethnicity; culture; societal, educational, and professional backgrounds; age; gender; religion; disability; and sexual orientation Applying principles of good ethical and legal practice as they relate to study design and data collection, dissemination, and use; understanding the concepts of human subjects protections and confidentiality and awareness of particular issues relevant to the study of specific populations Managing data from surveillance, investigations, or other sources Analyzing data from an epidemiologic investigation or study; presenting research data in both tabular and figure forms Summarizing results of the analysis and drawing conclusions Using effective communication technologies Producing the descriptive epidemiology of a given condition, including case definition, calculation of the primary measures of disease morbidity and mortality, and appropriate comparisons by person, place and time; listing the strengths and limitations of descriptive statistics Identifying data from existing national and international sources Identifying leading causes of death Knowing the principles of screening and of surveillance systems, including understanding the concepts of validity and reliability of screening tests and being able to calculate associated measures and knowing the types of surveillance systems and approaches used in disease surveillance Searching the literature; reviewing and critically evaluating the literature; synthesizing available information
A total of 17 competencies were viewed as important or very important for individuals earning various master- or doctorallevel degrees in epidemiology (Table 1), whereas eight competencies were reported as being unimportant for all individuals earning graduate degrees in epidemiology (Table 2). Twenty additional competencies were viewed as important or very important only for individuals receiving doctoral training. Examples include the following: designing surveillance systems, assisting in the preparation of proposals for extramural funding, identifying major gaps in knowledge, formulating original hypotheses, designing a study, identifying and minimizing sources of bias, using methods of measurement, calculating sample size, and examining data for the presence of confounding or interaction. There were numerous discrepancies in rating the importance of competencies for individuals receiving various master-level degrees. For example, interpreting and recognizing implications of research results was viewed as important for individuals with MPH degrees but not for individuals with MSPH or MS degrees. Conversely, providing epidemiologic input into studies, public health programs, or community public health planning processes was regarded as important for individuals with MS degrees but not for those with MPH or MSPH degrees. In addition, recent master-level graduates identified nine domains in which they felt less prepared and recent doctoral-level graduates identified two such domains (Table 3).
Survey results A total of 183 individuals participated in the surveys (n ¼ 147 [established epidemiologist survey], n ¼ 36 [recent graduate survey]). Most of the established epidemiologist respondents were between the ages of 56 to 65 years (32.7%) and male (57.1%). Nearly 40% reported currently working in an academic setting. The remaining participants worked in the following settings: government (15.6%), hospital (12.9%), private or research (8.2%), other (20.4%), and unknown (1.4%). Recent graduates were predominantly less than 35 years of age (58.3%) and female (69.4%). Half currently worked in an academic setting, whereas 13.9% worked in a hospital, 33.3% in the private or research sector, and 2.8% did not report their current employment.
Table 2 Competencies viewed as unimportant for individuals earning MS, MSPH, MPH, PhD, ScD, or DrPH degrees in epidemiology Evaluating programs Using laboratory resources to support epidemiologic activities Establishing relationships with groups of special concern Implementing operational and financial plans Promoting the organization’s vision in all programs and activities Using performance measures to evaluate and improve epidemiology program effectiveness Promoting workforce development Preparing for emergency response
468
L.R. Brunner Huber et al. / Annals of Epidemiology 25 (2015) 466e468
Data collection and monitoring (MS, MSPH) Study design (MSPH) Data management (MS, MSPH) Data analysis (MSPH)
Brownson and Jon Samet, spearheaded a committee that examined competencies that will be needed as epidemiology responds to a number of macro trends including big data, health care reform, and translational research. The committee will release a write-up over the next few months. Ultimately, these efforts can help to ensure that all epidemiologists receive sufficient training in identified areas.
Biology (PhD, ScD)
Acknowledgment
Table 3 Domains recent graduates said were important to their current jobs but in which they felt they were not adequately prepared Assessment and analysis (MS, MSPH) Basic Public Health Science (MS, PhD, ScD) Communication (MS, MSPH) Basic knowledge of leading public health problems and history of the discipline (MSPH) Problem conceptualization (MSPH)
Future work and implications Although these survey results provide considerable insight into what competencies are important for individuals receiving graduate training in epidemiology, they also highlight some areas for future consideration. Specifically, more examination of the similarities and differences among MS, MSPH, and MPH degrees and the differing expectations in competencies for these degrees is needed. In addition, exploring how competencies may differ by work setting is warranted. At the 2010 ACE Annual Meeting in San Francisco, results were reported to the Council of Epidemiology Chairs for discussion and at a Luncheon Roundtable Workshop. ACE continues to work on the competencies project. Former ACE Presidents, Ross
This project was supported by the American College of Epidemiology. References [1] Association of Schools of Public Health. ACE/ASPH workshop on doctoral education in epidemiology: workshop summary. Baltimore, MD. 2002. [2] University of Illinois at Chicago. Master’s Degree in Public Health Core Competency Development Project. 2006. Available from: https://www.uic.edu/sph/ prepare/courses/chsc400/syllabus/mphcorecomp.pdf. [accessed 06.2.2015]. [3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC/CSTE Competencies for Applied Epidemiologists in Governmental Public Health Agencies. 2008. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/AppliedEpiCompetencies/. [accessed 06.2.2015]. [4] Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Doctor of Public Health Core Competency Model. 2009. Available from: http://www.aspph.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/04/DrPHVersion1-3.pdf. [accessed 06.2.2015].
