• Criterion 27—Activities that Teach about the Implementation of Health Informatics. This criterion encourages providers to teach learners how to apply the wisdom gained from health information to improve health and promote changes in practice. Note: This advanced practice criterion will reward providers that go the extra mile to develop CME based on real-time events and data driven by healthcare outcomes. This criterion does not need to just apply to health systems and academic centers that may have direct access to informatics. Medical education companies and specialty society providers can also access this data through their planners and their planners’ institutions. This criterion has the potential to be among the more impactful changes to the ACCME system, but it will require a little more time and effort by providers to truly develop CME that makes a difference.

• Criterion 28—The CME Program Addresses Factors Beyond Clinical Care that Affects the Health of Populations, as demonstrated by teaching learners how they can intervene in health behaviors, social and economic factors, and the public’s physical environment. Note: This advanced criterion may be difficult for many providers to address because it requires access to longitudinal data that can be connected to their program of CME. However, there are several schools of medicine that have developed population health divisions or have combined schools of medicine and public health. Some specialty societies have access to programs that have tracked the health of patients associated with the disease state represented by the association and can derive data showing a substantial link to population health improvements.

• Criterion 29—Development of Individualized CME Activities. Consistent with Maintenance of Certification, or MOC, where physicians are facilitated in assessing their personal gaps in performance, or with some medical centers that are asking their clinical departments to meet with physicians within departments to identify areas of practice in which there is a personal gap, this criterion rewards providers that use CME to address the specific needs of an individual with a customized set of educational interventions. The needs may be derived from a variety of sources (e.g., performance measures, formal assessments) but the sources must produce data and information about the individual’s professional practice gaps and educational needs. Demonstration of compliance for this criterion will require evidence of an individual curriculum for each learner, or customization of an already existing curriculum for the learner, which is designed to close the individual’s professional practice gaps. Providers will be expected to evaluate changes in the competence, performance, or patient outcomes of each individual learner, relative to the identified gaps and needs. Note: In the era of mass-produced CME, this criterion adds gravitas to the concept of individualized CME, which many experts predict will be a substantial part of CME in the near future. For hospitals and health systems, this criterion can reinforce the link between privileges and CME, and between quality outcomes and CME. It also can provide a tailored approach to individual physician curricula that will be useful for those learners and strengthen the impact CME has on changing practice behaviors. For any provider that supports its learners in preparing for MOC and recertification and has the technical expertise to design systems for individual physicians to assess their own needs, this criterion will provide justification for expansion into customized CME.