TY - JOUR T1 - Physician Opinions about American Board of Family Medicine Self-Assessment Modules (2006–2016) JF - The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine JO - J Am Board Fam Med SP - 79 LP - 88 DO - 10.3122/jabfm.2019.01.170472 VL - 32 IS - 1 AU - Mingliang Dai AU - Michael Hagen AU - Aimee R. Eden AU - Lars E. Peterson Y1 - 2019/01/01 UR - http://www.jabfm.org/content/32/1/79.abstract N2 - Introduction: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) was implemented to help physicians remain current with evolving medical standards, but has been criticized for being irrelevant to practice. We assessed family physicians' (FPs') opinions about the content of American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) self-assessment modules (SAMs).Methods: We used ABFM administrative data from feedback surveys completed after each of the 16 SAMs from 2006 to 2016. FPs rated agreement with 2 statements—1) “Content is appropriate for my practice,” and 2) “Content was presented at an appropriate level”—on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). We calculated mean ratings of each statement by year and stratified by Knowledge Assessment (KA) and Clinical Simulation (CS) portions of the SAM. We plotted mean ratings by FPs' age at their first SAM completion and the total number of SAMs completed.Results: SAMs were completed (n = 633,198) from 2006 to 2016 with 448,408 (71%) feedback surveys completed. The annual mean ratings of both statements varied little (less than 0.5) and were above 4.5 for all SAMs. CS ratings were consistently lower than KA ratings. FPs of all ages at first SAM provided similar ratings and agreement with content appropriateness increased with repeated exposure to SAMs.Conclusion: Over 11 years, the content of ABFM SAMs was regarded by FPs as appropriate for practice and presented at an appropriate level. Continued monitoring of feedback is necessary to keep the content of MOC programs relevant for physicians' practice. ER -