Site Reviewer Training Course: Commission on Cancer - CME
The Commission on Cancer's Site Reviewer Training course is intended to equip Site Reviewers with the tools and knowledge needed to evaluate sites' compliance with the Commission on Cancer's standards.
The course includes nine modules:
- Welcome to ACS: an introduction to ACS and the ACS Quality Programs
- Overview of the Commission on Cancer: an introduction to the Commission on Cancer
- Site Reviewers and Site Visits: a comprehensive overview of the Reviewer role
- Program Standards: an overview of the standard domains, their outcomes, and common deficiencies
- Operations: a review of the nuts and bolts of how the Quality programs operate
- The Quality Portal: a review of the Site Reviewer-specific elements in the Quality Portal (QPort)
- Preparing for the Site Visit: an overview of scheduling and other pre-site visit responsibilities
- Conducting the Site Visit: a detailed walk-through of each component of the site visit
- Following Up Post-Site Visit: an overview of what to expect following a site visit
The Site Reviewer Training Course: Commission on Cancer is intended for CoC Site Reviewers at the American College of Surgeons.
Upon completion of the course, you should be able to:
- Explain how the American College of Surgeons has been striving towards continuous quality improvement.
- Explain how your quality program strives towards its mission.
- Explain the role of effective Site Reviewers in the ACS Quality Programs.
- Interpret the program's standards accurately and consistently.
- Explain the operations of the site visit process, including required documentation, scheduling, and payment.
- Identify the location of key information in the ACS Quality Portal.
- Explain how to effectively prepare for a site visit.
- Explain how to conduct an effective site visit.
- Explain how to effectively complete the post-site visit documentation.
- Explain how site visit outcomes are determined.
- Windows: Microsoft Edge (latest version), Google Chrome (latest version), Firefox (latest version)
- Mac: Safari (latest version), Google Chrome (latest version), Firefox (latest version)
Required Browser Settings
- Font Downloads: Font downloads must be enabled to see the correct fonts and characters.
- Adobe Acrobat Reader
- Microsoft Office® Excel and Word
In accordance with the ACCME Accreditation Criteria, the American College of Surgeons must ensure that anyone in a position to control the content of the educational activity (planners and speakers/authors/discussants/moderators) has disclosed all financial relationships with any commercial interest (termed by the ACCME as “ineligible companies”, defined below) held in the last 24 months (see below for definitions). Please note that first authors were required to collect and submit disclosure information on behalf all other authors/contributors, if applicable.
The ACCME defines an “ineligible company” as any entity producing, marketing, re-selling, or distributing health care goods or services used on or consumed by patients. Providers of clinical services directly to patients are NOT included in this definition.
Relationships in which the individual benefits by receiving a salary, royalty, intellectual property rights, consulting fee, honoraria, ownership interest (e.g., stocks, stock options or other ownership interest, excluding diversified mutual funds), or other financial benefit. Financial benefits are usually associated with roles such as employment, management position, independent contractor (including contracted research), consulting, speaking and teaching, membership on advisory committees or review panels, board membership, and other activities from which remuneration is received, or expected.
Conflict of Interest
Circumstances create a conflict of interest when an individual has an opportunity to affect CME content about products or services of an ineligible company with which he/she has a financial relationship.
The ACCME also requires that ACS manage any reported conflict and eliminate the potential for bias during the educational activity. Any conflicts noted below have been managed to our satisfaction. The disclosure information is intended to identify any commercial relationships and allow learners to form their own judgments. However, if you perceive a bias during the educational activity, please report it on the evaluation.
Planning Committee / Editorial Committee
Erin Dekoster (Nothing to disclose)
Samantha McArdle (Nothing to disclose)
Colleen Fleming (Nothing to disclose)
Emily Hoffman (Nothing to disclose)
Karen Pollitt (Nothing to disclose)
Erica McNamara (Nothing to disclose)
Pete Vega (Nothing to disclose)
Vicki Markhardt (Nothing to disclose)
- 3.00 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™
- 3.00 Certificate of Completion