Healthy People 2010 Data
When Healthy People 2010 was released in 2000, Objective 1.7 was a “Developmental Objective.” Developmental objectives did not have national baseline data or operational definitions at the time Healthy People 2010 was first published, but identified areas of emerging importance. Developmental objectives were intended to stimulate the identification or creation of data systems to measure them; if no baseline data were available for developmental objectives by mid-decade, the developmental objectives would be eliminated.
Among the Task Force’s seven initial health professions groups, the availability of pre-existing data collection activities to track curriculum content varied. AACOM and AAMC could assess curricular content annually through institutional surveys that are required to maintain accreditation. Both of the physician education groups also could indirectly assess curricula through annual surveys of their graduating students. AACN and NONPF did not have regular surveys in place, but had fielded surveys in recent history that could provide baseline data. Because the other organizations did not have baseline data available, the physician (AACOM, AAMC) and nursing associations (AACN, NONPF) used their data sources to provide the required baselines at the midcourse review. “Counseling for behavior change” and “cultural diversity” were the content areas with data available for all four professional groups, and were chosen as the “sentinel” domains to be measured for Healthy People 2010. In light of the limited subject areas that were chosen for tracking, the wording of Objective 1.7 was revised during the midcourse review to “Increase the proportion of schools of medicine, schools of nursing, and other health professional training schools whose basic curriculum for health care providers includes the inclusion of sentinel core competencies in health promotion and disease prevention in health profession training.”
The four participating associations agreed to track the number of schools or programs that included the sentinel domains in their required curricula (as opposed to including the content in elective opportunities only). The standard “10% improvement” goal was applied to all of the sub-objectives, resulting in a 100% end-of-decade goal for the sub-objectives that had very high baseline levels. At the end of Healthy People 2010, all four groups had made improvements, but not all had reached their assigned end-of-decade goals.
Among the Task Force’s seven initial health professions groups, the availability of pre-existing data collection activities to track curriculum content varied. AACOM and AAMC could assess curricular content annually through institutional surveys that are required to maintain accreditation. Both of the physician education groups also could indirectly assess curricula through annual surveys of their graduating students. AACN and NONPF did not have regular surveys in place, but had fielded surveys in recent history that could provide baseline data. Because the other organizations did not have baseline data available, the physician (AACOM, AAMC) and nursing associations (AACN, NONPF) used their data sources to provide the required baselines at the midcourse review. “Counseling for behavior change” and “cultural diversity” were the content areas with data available for all four professional groups, and were chosen as the “sentinel” domains to be measured for Healthy People 2010. In light of the limited subject areas that were chosen for tracking, the wording of Objective 1.7 was revised during the midcourse review to “Increase the proportion of schools of medicine, schools of nursing, and other health professional training schools whose basic curriculum for health care providers includes the inclusion of sentinel core competencies in health promotion and disease prevention in health profession training.”
The four participating associations agreed to track the number of schools or programs that included the sentinel domains in their required curricula (as opposed to including the content in elective opportunities only). The standard “10% improvement” goal was applied to all of the sub-objectives, resulting in a 100% end-of-decade goal for the sub-objectives that had very high baseline levels. At the end of Healthy People 2010, all four groups had made improvements, but not all had reached their assigned end-of-decade goals.
Graph 1 -- (dotted line represents Healthy People 2010 target)
Graph 2 -- targets met