• Criterion 23—Multi-interventional approaches to maximizing the impact of CME (e.g., more than one format within an activity combined in a series of activities; a series of sessions/formats to address one professional practice gap). This criterion encourages providers to take a curriculum approach to addressing one professional practice gap, in which multiple formats could be employed to reinforce results through a sequential education approach. This is consistent with adult learning principles. Note: This criterion will require a purposeful approach to designing CME that builds one result on top of another to deliver a true change in learner behavior. By engaging in sequential education, learners will be able to stage new practice changes and improve competence, which contributes to a better result from CME.

• Criterion 24—Engagement in Interprofessional Collaborative Practices in the planning and delivery of interprofessional continuing education activities. “Interprofessional collaborative practice” includes multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds who work together with patients, families, caregivers, and communities to deliver care. “Interprofessional education” means that learners from two or more professions learn with, from, and about each other to enable interprofessional collaborative practice. Note: This new criterion, while similar to Criterion 20, is consistent with the ACCME’s support for joint accreditation. It is more than that, though. For the first time we see a recognition that the family unit, including caregivers, the team or village, if you will, surrounding the patient, and the patient him or herself, can be part of the planning process.

• Criterion 25—Integration of Patient and Public Representatives into the Process of Planning CME as planners, teachers, and learners in CME. Because accredited CME needs to advance the interests of the people who are served by the healthcare system, the involvement of patients and the public in the planning process and presentation of CME advances the public interest. NOTE: Consistent with the inclusion of a public representative on the ACCME Board of Directors, this criterion brings this heretofore public representative into the process of CME. It also integrates the perspective of the patient, who now joins with physician experts to offer a unique and important perspective on the topic of education.

• Criterion 26—Integration of Undergraduate or Postgraduate Health Professions’ Students as CME Researchers and CME Planners. Because CME is an integral part of the continuum of medical education in the United States, the ACCME is facilitating the involvement of medical students and other physicians-in-training or students from other health professions in the research and planning of CME as a form of practice-based learning. Note: This criterion will be of interest in particular to hospitals, health systems, and academic centers in which the continuum of medical education is manifested. In regularly scheduled series CME, for example, the presence of residents and other house staff has always been a known component in planning. The inclusion of students legitimizes this process and gives weight to the importance of lifelong learning and the seamless integration of undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education.