Towards a Core Curriculum for italian Family Medicine: results of a transparent, participatory and collective writing.

Alice Serafini, Stefano Celotto, Jacopo Demurtas, Giuseppe Febbo, Davide Luppi, Alessandro Mereu, Nicola Pecora, Giorgio Sessa, Luigi Brachitta, Peter Konstantin Kurotschka, Ilaria Rossiello, Elena Rubatto

Keywords: Core Curriculum; GP training;

Scientific evidence shows how Family Medicine (FM), internationally recognized as an academic and scientific discipline, has a significant impact on the health of the community and on the appropriate use of public resources. Despite this, in Italy, the national legislation of reference for the FM training does not define the educational programs to be followed, the competences to be acquired, the teaching and learning methods of the discipline or the criteria of evaluation for the achievement of the title of General Practitioner. A project for writing a Core Curriculum of the Italian GP and the dedicated working group "MMG Core Curriculum Task Force" have been promoted by the Movimento Giotto (MG, member of the Vasco da Gama Movement).

Research questions:
To elaborate a Core Curriculum that establishes what, where, how to learn and how to evaluate the specialized competences of the professional FM

Form February to May 2019, a transparent process of collective and participatory writing took place, through different phases: An internal call through the MG for the recruitment of the Coordinator's Task Force (9 coordinators); Self-training and drafting of the index of the document, in a comparative perspective; A public Call to recruit collaborators (52 young italian FM) for the collective drawing up of the chapters; A peer review of the contents produced;

A 200 pages document "Towards the Core Curriculum of General Medicine" has been produced, divided into three chapters describing: the rationale of the project, the Core Competencies and the clinical skills identified in five macro-areas of clinical practice.

The proposal document, thus necessarily still incomplete, needs a deeper reflection and sharing with other actors of the health system. The MG aims to proceed to further steps in the coming months, in order to build consent on the document (Delphi Method or Consensus Conference).

Points for discussion:
What are the strengths and limitations of the participatory methodology used from MG to build the document?

What could be the best methodology to proceede to further steps and build consent on the document?

What could be the role of EGPRN and the international community of FM researchers?