Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 1 February 2018
- Published on: 1 February 2018Canadian Certification vs Canadian Accreditation
Letter to the Editor – Journal of Clinical Pathology
We read with interest the invited editorial by Grealish et al. entitled “Standardisation of practice for Canadian pathologists' assistants.” First of all, we would like to congratulate the CAP-ACP Executive Committee on its accomplishments to date. Establishing a method for board certification of Canadian Pathologists’ Assistants (PAs) is an important achievement which promotes standardization and high quality anatomical pathology services.
However, our primary reason for writing is to address an error of omission. The editorial correctly notes that there are four two year long Master’s PA training programs in Canada; however, it should be also noted that these vary considerably in size with a ten-fold difference between the largest and the smallest based upon the number of students currently enrolled. The editorial then implies that Canadian training programmes are not accredited and are in need of some new mechanism to become accredited. The editorial states that “the pursuit of creating a ... Canadian accrediting body for PA training programme is ongoing.” We respectfully disagree. The two large Canadian training programmes, hosted by the University of Calgary and Western University, respectively have each been accredited by the National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences (NAACLS) (https://www.naacls.org/about.aspx ). NAACLS...
Show MoreConflict of Interest:
None declared.