The number of Global Emergency Medicine (GEM) Fellowship training programs are increasing worldwide. Despite the increasing number of GEM fellowships, there is not an agreed upon approach for assessment of GEM trainees. In order to study the lack of standardized assessment in GEM fellowship training, a working group was established between the International EM Fellowship Consortium (IEMFC) and the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM). A needs assessment survey of IEMFC members and a review were undertaken to identify assessment tools currently in use by GEM fellowship programs; what relevant frameworks exist; and common elements used by programs with a wide diversity of emphases. A consensus framework was developed through iterative working group discussions. Thirty-two of 40 GEM fellowships responded (80% response). There is variability in the use and format of formal assessment between programs. Thirty programs reported training GEM fellows in the last 3 years (94%). Eighteen (56%) reported only informal assessments of trainees. Twenty-seven (84%) reported regular meetings for assessment of trainees. Eleven (34%) reported use of a structured assessment of any sort for GEM fellows and, of these, only 2 (18%) used validated instruments modified from general EM residency assessment tools. Only 3 (27%) programs reported incorporation of formal written feedback from partners in other countries. Using these results along with a review of the available assessment tools in GEM the working group developed a set of principles to guide GEM fellowship assessments along with a sample assessment for use by GEM fellowship programs seeking to create their own customized assessments. There are currently no widely used assessment frameworks for GEM fellowship training. The working group made recommendations for developing standardized assessments aligned with competencies defined by the programs, that characterize goals and objectives of training, and document progress of trainees towards achieving those goals. Frameworks used should include perspectives of multiple stakeholders including partners in other countries where trainees conduct field work. Future work may evaluate the usability, validity and reliability of assessment frameworks in GEM fellowship training.

中文翻译：

---

致力于为全球急诊医学研究金建立共识评估框架

全球急诊医学研究金培训计划的数量在世界范围内正在增加。尽管GEM研究金的数量不断增加，但仍没有商定的评估GEM学员的方法。为了研究GEM研究金培训中缺乏标准化评估的问题，国际EM研究金联合会（IEMFC）和国际急诊医学联合会（IFEM）之间建立了一个工作组。对IEMFC成员进行了需求评估调查，并进行了审查，以确定GEM研究金计划当前正在使用的评估工具；存在哪些相关框架；以及具有广泛重点的程序所使用的通用元素。通过反复的工作组讨论建立了共识框架。40个GEM奖学金中有32个得到了回应（80％的回应）。程序之间正式评估的使用和格式存在差异。过去的30年中，有30个计划报告了对GEM研究员的培训（94％）。十八（56％）人仅报告了对学员的非正式评估。二十七（84％）人举报例会以评估学员。11个（34％）报告了对GEM研究员使用任何形式的结构化评估，其中只有2个（18％）使用了从一般EM居住评估工具中修改而来的经过验证的工具。只有3个（27％）计划报告纳入了来自其他国家/地区合作伙伴的正式书面反馈。利用这些结果以及对GEM中可用评估工具的审查，工作组制定了一套原则来指导GEM奖学金评估以及样本评估，以供寻求创建自己的定制评估的GEM奖学金计划使用。目前，没有针对创业板研究金培训的广泛使用的评估框架。工作组提出了建议，以开发与计划定义的能力相一致的标准化评估，这些评估应表征培训的目标和目的，并记录受训人员在实现这些目标方面的进展。所使用的框架应包括多个利益相关者的观点，这些利益相关者包括受训人员进行现场工作的其他国家/地区的合作伙伴。未来的工作可能会评估可用性，