← JAAPA Podcast
Loading summary
Transcript31 lines
- [00:00]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
Foreign.
- [00:06]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Welcome to the JOPPA Podcast. Listeners can earn CME by listening to the podcast. To receive your CME credit and access your certificate, you just listen to the podcast, then complete the post test and evaluation in AAPA's Learning Central at cme.aapa.org Post professional doctoral programs for PAs have grown rapidly over the last 10 years with broad educational tracks in clinical medicine, leadership and education, global health, informatics, and other specialized areas. These programs vary widely in duration, credit hours, entry requirements, and concentrations. Centralizing the accreditation of these programs has become a hot topic in the PA community over the last few years. Our authors today recently discussed this important topic in their article published in JAPA's December 2025 issue. Dr. Carrie Bernard and Dr. Aisha Hussain, thank you so much for joining us today. So before we discuss your article, can you tell us a little bit more about yourself and what was your path to becoming a PA and what led you to your interest in the topic today?
- [01:09]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
Thanks Joe. I started my path as a PA back in 2013 when I graduated from Bay School and I transitioned over into hospital medicine. I practiced clinically for about four years and then I was like I need to learn more and I stumbled upon the Doctor of Medical Science program at Lincoln Memorial University. I matriculated into that clinical track and surprisingly a year into the program I was like I fell in love with the science of academia so I added on the education track to my path and I think that was enough. That sparked my interest in teaching and I transitioned slowly but surely over into academia within a few years. By 2021 I was full time faculty and I currently serve as Associate professor at Lincoln Memorial University. In regards to in my interest in the topic today, I think for me it was really about advocacy, especially for like my clinical camaraderie. Academic jargon like meant nothing to me, but I feel like in the clinic world accreditation is like the gold seal, right? It's it's like this is quality. And it was so important for me to advocate to people that are pursuing a doctorate currently or considering a doctorate to understand that accreditation is truly about alignment and the program that you matriculate into should align with the accrediting body that it's being supported by.
- [02:29]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
My story is not quite as eloquent as Aisha's. Dr. Hussain's I started being a PA in 2004 about 20. This is my 22nd year and I initially was drawn to emergency medicine quite frankly because I wanted to have a high paying job with excellent time off. But unfortunately what I really wanted as a pa, which I didn't quite appreciate, was relationships with patients. And so that misfit between emergency medicine and my kind of what I valued about myself as a provider led to burnout pretty quickly. So I experienced pretty classic compassion fatigue. And I really just thought I had had made a mistake becoming a pa. And that lasted for about six years until I moved to Anchorage, Alaska, and found my way into PA education. There was a branch of University of Washington medics program up in Anchorage, and I got invited to do some guest lectures. And I realized that I loved being in the classroom. And so I was able to rediscover my passion for medicine in the PA classroom. But I started to have a little bit of cognitive dissonance as I was graduating my students and marching them off into the same healthcare system that had burned me out. And so, out of an interest of learning more, I started a PhD program in industrial and organizational psychology, which is a mouthful, but the important point is that it allowed me to study the mental health of the workforce. And so I was able to become an expert in healthcare burnout and bring lessons that I learned back into PA education. I realized around this time that I really was truly an educator. I had a knack for it, and I also had a knack for program development. And so I had an opportunity to design and launch the Doctor of Medical Science program at the College of Idaho. And so I have been all in with that pursuit. And my interest in the accreditation has to do with some research that I did to support my work at the DMSC program, which kind of uncovered that DNP program. So Doctor of Nursing Programs, they have centralized accreditation that had failed to address the need to train educators. And so they've been training clinical providers, which, of course, nurse practitioners do an excellent job, but they now have a nursing faculty shortage. And so when I launched the dmsc, I didn't want to make the mistake of not aligning our offerings with what the market needed, what PA expansion, role expansion needed, and I didn't want to put us in that situation. So I think it's, for me, accreditation has to be flexible enough to be responsive to the needs of the community. So that kind of triggered my interest in this.
- [05:22]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Thank you so much. Thank both of you. I think it's always fun to hear your path to becoming a PA and how you ended up where you are, because we definitely all have realized that each one of us has our own unique story and our own unique path, and I think that's important for our listeners to also know that there's not one path. Right. Everybody kind of creates their own path. So thank you for that. So, getting on to your article. In your article, you discuss some history of the PA specific doctorate program. Can you give our listeners a brief history of these programs and how this led to the current landscape of the Doctor of Medical Science programs?
- [06:00]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
Yes. So you didn't realize enough. I'm like a nerd. And history is totally fascinating. But back in 2007, the US army and Baylor College of Medicine designed a doctorate specifically for military PAs to give them this like high level expertise that they needed for the complex trauma and emergency cases that they were seeing in their day to day. And I feel like that was the proof of concept. It showed that, hey, there's a need in the community. And this doctorate program addressed that need. That was back in 2007. It wasn't until 2016, about a decade later, that Lincoln Memorial University launched the first Doctor of Medical Science program designed specifically for PAs. But it was the exact same setup where they looked at the community and realized there was two urgent needs. There was a lack of rural clinicians in those communities, and then there was a lack of educators in those same communities for PAs. And so they had two clinical focuses, clinical medicine and medical education. And it wasn't long before University of Lynchburg launched their program in 2017. Within three years, in 2019, we saw three new programs, then four new, then three new. By 2025, we had five new. I skipped 2024. It was the magic year. We had six new programs and in 2026 we expecting eight new programs. So we essentially went from one in 2016 to over 40 in 2026. And the part that's not, that's more fascinating than just the sheer number is the fact that we not only grew in volume, but we also grew in specialties. And it was an obvious relationship with what the needs of the communities were. So we started off with kind of more conventional things like educators, to which Carrie alluded to, and advanced clinical specialty focuses, leadership, administration. And then we branched out into business and entrepreneurship and computer science and so many other module models. That was a really great quick synopsis of history. So you've already started to hint about the diversity of these programs, and in your article you say that they are diverse by design. What is it about the programs that make them diverse? And why do you feel this is important for PAs? Even more so how does this translate into tangible value for patients, health systems and PA professional development?
- [08:14]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
Yeah, that's a great Question. And I do wanna give Aisha credit for coming up with the Diverse by Design. As soon as, you know, we were going back and forth about what to name the article, and as soon as I saw that, it was like, it's. That is a perfect description. And what I want to emphasize, and Aisha already kind of set me up for this, is that DMSC programs do two things really, really well. First, because they are launched and designed by PAs, who typically have been in the profession for a while, who are advocates. Like Aisha said, they really have their finger on the pulse of what PAs need and what the market needs. And so DMSC programs are great at responding to the ever evolving needs of the health care system. You'll see there are specialties in health informatics. I anticipate artificial intelligence specialties coming if there isn't one already. And I'm sure Aisha could tell me yes or no on that. There are tracks for medical science liaisons, which is a kind of later career opportunity that some PAs are taking. And so this type of diversity is characteristic of these programs and kind of we're able to do it relatively quickly, like, like recruiting experts and standing up these new programs. Most of the DMSD programs are online, and so that means that our content is accessible to PAs across the United States. So any PA that wants to take advantage of these diverse programs doesn't matter where the program is located as opposed to where they are located. The other thing that DMSC programs do really well is they leverage their local campus resources. At the College of Idaho, we have a lifestyle medicine track, and the origin of that is that we have an affiliation with the Idaho State University PA program. And on their faculty, they have several lifestyle medicine experts. So we worked with them to conceive the program, design it, and now they, one of their retired faculty members is teaching it for us. Other campuses, like A.T. still, they reached across colleges and they actually recruited professors from tracks like public health, emergency preparedness, global health. So they're able to recruit faculty from other departments outside of the DMSC to create these specialty tracks for PAs. And so that's really what our current setup enables is this leveraging local campus resources and responding to market needs, which of course, like Aisha said, is going to benefit the patients, because PAS have always responded to health care workforce shortages. And so wherever these shortages are, these specialty tracks are popping up. I heard one of my mentors maybe like 10 years ago, responded, she labeled PAs as the neutrophils of the health system. Like, we're always rushing where the need is. So I think these DMSD programs really support that.
- [11:07]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
And do you see any parallels between the PA, post professional doctorate and advanced degrees in other fields such as the Ph.D. ed, edd or doctor of Public Health? Yeah. And to Carrie's point, and I think it's so imperative that we do parallel the degree to other, these post professional doctors or these doctors in general. Right. When we're looking at a PhD in science, for example, or an EDD in education, Dr. Of Public Health, Doctor of Business Administration, all of these degrees have a very consistent pattern. Right. Each one of these degrees has an accreditation platform that's perfectly aligned with those degree specific goals. So you don't see someone pursuing a degree in Doctorate of Business Administration that has to meet standards of someone pursuing a degree in lab science. And more importantly, none of these degrees change the professional license of the person pursuing it. So these degrees simply serve as like a specialized second layer of expertise. Right. We've, our profession has prided itself on us being the best clinicians in primary care, and we, we do that to the greatest of ability. But now we're adding this second layer because the community is saying, we're thankful for you as a pa, but now we need a PA leader in this field, we need a PA educator in this field, and we need someone with that second layer of expertise. And this is what, this is the response of these doctoral programs. Right. It's, it's a, it's a true, like, market analysis of the epitome of growth as our response.
- [12:32]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Oh, great. Thank you so much. So, so in your article, you also refer to the consortium. Can you tell us, tell our listeners a little bit more about the consortium, its role, and why it's important?
- [12:44]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
I would be honored to describe the DMS DMSC consortium. And one thing I did want to point out is that as Aisha and I get deeper into this conversation, you might notice that we use two separate abbreviations for the dmsc, dms. And that's because we haven't. We are so still relatively early in the emergence of this degree that we haven't even decided on a standardized approach to our credentials. And so Aisha's program is a dms, mine is a dmsc. So when I say dmsc, please know that I'm being inclusive of DMS programs as well. Just a little bit less cumbersome to keep going back and forth. But the Consortium of DMS DMSC programs is a special interest group of the physician Assistant Education Association. And it really is the first group that emerged as a collaborative community of PA specific doctorate program leaders. And I say collaborative with my whole heart. When I was starting to develop the College of Idaho DMSD program, I sought out the consortium. I didn't have to, you know, I was able to join the meetings. I was able to ask questions of the members, call up people and say, hey, this, we're thinking of this. What do you think? Like, what was your approach? It's an incredibly collaborative group of people that are all kind of partnering on a nine fold purpose. When I represent the consortium, I really want to talk quickly about these nine things that we try to do because it really does. It's true to what our everyday work together is. So the consortium really does approach its collective work by first and foremost providing a place for program leaders to collaborate and network. This is especially important when I was launching the DMSC program. We also share alumni data. We are very interested in creating research to document the outcomes for our graduates. And Aisha and I have actually worked on survey creation along those lines. We're promoting professional development opportunities. So we, because DMSC programs are becoming such an important part of the PA education landscape, we want to make sure that there are doctorate related workshops and seminars at these PA conferences. So we're really encouraging our consortium members to submit proposals. We also talk a lot about what should be in our curriculum development and how can we support each other's innovation. We're very interested in research and publication collaboration. Again, Aisha and I are a great example of this as we collaborated on this article. Quality assurance and accreditation is another important issue. Like what makes, what are these, Are there standards that exist that all DMSC programs should adhere to? And even though I think there's a potential for that in the future, I don't think we're there yet because the research is still very young. And so we are trying to, as a consortium, take responsibility and ownership of that and create our own research. We also participate in advocacy and policy influence. So we have been involved with the association, the Accreditation Review Commission of Physician Assistants, rpa, who is the centralized accreditor that we were referencing in our article. We've been involved with their attempt, with their development of these standards since the beginning. We want to be present at the table. The same mentor that talked about PAs being the neutrophils of the health system, she used to say, if you're not at the table, you're on the menu, of course. So she was just full of quips. And then finally we recognize that this degree is still learning its identity. And so as a consortium, we're committed to marketing and promoting the degree itself to increase awareness of what it offers PAs, and then also to constantly be talking about, where is this degree going?
- [16:22]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
So I have to ask, what prompted
- [16:24]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
you to write this article now?
- [16:25]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
And what specific developments in 2025 made the issue of the DMSC accreditation feel urgent? I think there was a lot of things, but the more most important thing was there was this critical breakdown in our professional dialogue. I love history and, you know, I like timelines. So this wasn't like a sudden reaction. We were, we've been tracking growth of the programs. We have this consortium. It's a very collaborative effort. We appreciated the diversity. In 2024, we had 20 programs, right, and six more coming. And at that same time, the RPA floated this idea of a centralized accrediting body. And almost immediately, the consortium kind of formally raised his hand and said, hey, we want to do this. If we're going to move in this direction, we need to have transparency and discussion, data driven decision making. We've seen this fail with the nurse practitioner world. We want to make sure that if this is the movement and if this is the approach we want to take, let's do this in a collaborative way and kind of move forward. And so we thought that that's where we were going. We established a task force for the doctoral programs to kind of meet with the arcpa. And as that proceeded, the paea, the Physician Assistant Education Association Board of Directors, voiced congruency with the consortium and said, hey, we also really would appreciate a data driven decision with open dialogue and transparency for the entire PA community. And then within a month, the AHRQ PA released official accreditation standards in July and said, these will be effective September 2025. And that was like a shock. That disconnect kind of changed the entire field. From a programmatic perspective, we felt like this was no longer a collaboration. It was more of like a firm mandate that, like, this is the direction that we're moving. Within a month, the consortium got together and responded to this, these new standards by developing a.
- [18:14]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
The resolution.
- [18:15]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
The resolution, yes. So we, we adopted a formal resolution. And it didn't just say, like, no, we're not going to abide. It was like, hey, listen, we have kind of three requests. We want to know what, what prompted this accelerated timeline? Like, what evidence do you stand on to kind of move forward so quickly with this? And we wanted to bring back that kind of transparency and discussion, slow down a little and have some more data driven decisions. We asked also specifically if the ARCPA had the scope in this timeline to authorize or accredit the programs of doctoral level, since they currently accredit our master's level degree programs. I think that was kind of the big why. When Carrie and I sat together, we were like, we can't keep this discussion in committees anymore. It's now directly affecting the matriculants of the doctoral community as well as the current enrollees. Right. We were worried that if they saw this sudden change, they'd need the answer as to why this is changing. And for those that are pursuing it, we wanted to equip them with the right information so they could make informed choices for the programs that they wanted to matriculate into.
- [19:24]
Joe (Podcast Host)
So I think I want to understand a little bit better about the difference between centralized versus institutional accreditation. How, how does that, like how might centralized accreditation practically change what a DMS or DMSC student experiences on a day to day basis compared with the current institutionally accredited model?
- [19:44]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
Yeah, Joe, I think that's a, that's a great question to kind of understand just like forms the foundation of this whole argument. So institutional accreditation is the gold standard for colleges and universities in the United States. I think it's safe to say that most college and university students attend an institutionally accredited program. And what that means is there are different regions in the United States with these accrediting bodies. And when you want to open up a program within their region, you apply and you basically submit evidence of the quality of your curriculum, the faculty that you plan to employ to deliver it, your student resources. So things like mental health care, access to learning disability resources, IT support, and then also institutional stability. Is the institution stable enough to be there when the students are ready to graduate? Institutional accreditation oversees all of this. You have to submit progress reports, and if you're going to make a substantial change to your curriculum, you have to submit updates. But it tends to be, again, it allows that responsiveness. It doesn't have a rigid set of standards that you have to meet. This is in contrast to centralized accreditation, which is again is what the ARCPA is offering to DMSC programs. And these types of centralized accrediting bodies are often what you see accrediting scope of practice programs. So, so think about your lawyers who are taking the bar exam, or your medical students are taking their boards, or PA students that are taking the PA national certifying exam. Centralized accreditors create rigid, very specific guidelines because they want students that complete these programs to basically look the same upon graduation so that they can then take the certifying exam or the licensing exam and then qualify for these different sets of credentials in order to practice within their scope. Now the DMSC program does not extend PA scope of practice. PAs are allowed based on their background, their experience, their training to deliver the clinical care as allowed by their state practice acts. We all know that. And while a PA may go to a clinical training program, a DMSC with a clinical training background, it's not the only way that they can glean these skills. They could attend a training at a conference or a training by of a creator of a medical device and then that would qualify them to do that set of skills. So it is not required for a PA to complete a DMSC in order to expand their scope of practice. And then of course you have educators and PA leaders that are taking these different concentration concentrations in order to do roles like that. And generally, you know, these training programs give them the skills they need. But again, because it doesn't expand, expand their scope of practice, centralized accreditation is not appropriate. Now you asked how it would affect the day to day experience of DMSC students. The most obvious thing is that accreditation costs money. And so, and it's not an insignificant amount. And so that money not only to apply for accreditation but to maintain it. And then if there's any like lapses in accreditation, then you have to pay in order to be evaluated to see if you've overcome that lapse. It's just like what master's level PA programs go through. And so this increase in cost is going to naturally be passed on or be reflected in tuition. The other thing that centralized accreditation has the risk of doing is limiting the types of faculty that you can hire to doctoral trained PAs. Now this, you may think at first glance that's a good idea, but think about, you know, we, we have a class in kind of entrepreneurship and we have an MBA trained PA who teaches that class. So under centralized accreditation I may not be able to hire him. And so generally we like to have flexibility to hire the right person for the job. Now on the flip side, I'm not sure that a PA who attends a non ARCPA accredited program is going to notice any difference if a program does not have ARCPA accreditation. They have the innovation that they want in order to respond to the market. And then they also have the institutional accreditation robustness and validity to reassure the students that they do have to, you know, that they have met these standards in order to be accredited.
- [24:11]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Thank you. So you mentioned earlier about the proposed standards for the DMSC programs from arcpa. So what were some of those key elements that were proposed by the arcpa, those standards that were proposed that maybe the ones that maybe most concerned you and the consortium. And how did the consortium respond to these proposed standards?
- [24:35]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
Carrie stole my thunder. So probably, and kind of we've emphasized this enough, like a one size fits all model will unintentionally stifle the existing diversity and quality and the choices that are available to matriculating students. Right. And when we thought about a centralized accreditation, accreditation, we asked ourselves individually from a program level and then also from the consortium, what value would these standards add to the student? Right. And Carrie hit on kind of the first point. It would, it would require these programs to be, like, dual accredited. And one of the first accreditation standards is that your institution from the ARC is that the institution is stable and can offer this type of accreditation, which we've already validated in our institutional standards. And so if we just kind of move past the fact that it would require a dual accreditation. The second thing, and Carrie highlighted this very well, is there's very prescriptive faculty requirements, which makes sense for centralized accreditation. Because if I'm responsible for teaching you to be an expert in a. In your clinical scope or in your clinical practice, I would expect that someone that has that experience is teaching that to you. But when we're talking about different fields and different kind of structures and expertise, we want to reach out to our local resources in our community and pull in the experts within those physical fields without having to pass through a whole bunch of red tape to get that. So having such a prescriptive or kind of like checkbox requirement of which faculty we can bring into our programs would be a hurdle, and it would prolong kind of program development or program change, and then that would just prevent us from reaching our communities faster. And the third, and I feel like the biggest deal is in a centralized accrediting body and like what Carrie had described, there's specific curriculum requirements that must be met. So it's like a list of, like, you must, you must teach these seven topics, for example, in these standards. Leadership was one of them, unscholarly work. And although those are like, kind of expectations at that doctoral level, it doesn't always make sense for perhaps a program in informatics or someone pursuing a business degree to have specific checkboxes of those leadership courses. Right. It's not just you need to take These specific set of leadership within maybe that business degree. But no, it's like, this topic must be covered. And it doesn't always make sense to cover specific topics when you're focused on a different path. And that's cumbersome because if I'm pursuing a degree, it's like, oh, I got to take a couple extra classes so my program can meet this accreditation. And that I imagine would be very frustrating to the student. And then it boils down again to cost, right? You're taking these, these, they're not just a couple of extra classes or a few extra months. That's tuition, that's a semester, that's a course. And so we thought, okay, maybe the, the conversation can be like, well, maybe you can generalize what courses or maybe make it more of a general curriculum. Right? But then it's like, then what value are you adding? If you're just going to say you need to have something along the lines of this, it's not prescriptive enough to actually offer value. And so those were our biggest concerns. It's like, if we want to have a centralized crediting body, we have to be very structured in the approach of what that needs to entail. Oh, and then I know you asked another question. So what did the consortium do? Right, the arc, when they accelerated their timeline and they said these standards will be effective September 2025. The consortium adopted their formal resolution in August of 2025. And we didn't just say no. We wanted clarity on three specific aspects. One, and I, and I mentioned these a little bit earlier. Does the RFPA have the scope and authority or like legal standing to regulate specialized doctorates on this timeline? And then we asked for some data illustrating how the standards could align to all the programs that exist. Because this was in 2025. We already had 30 plus programs. And so if you're going to mandate standards for these 30 plus programs, how will it effectively be inclusive for these programs? And then we, we, we called again for a meaningful and transparent dialogue between the ARC and the directors and educators within the programs that existed. And we were essentially just advocating for a supportive model. Like, if we're going to move forward with accreditation, let's do this together.
- [28:45]
Unidentified Interviewer/Questioner
If ahrq, PA or other bodies wanted to support post professional PE education without centralizing accreditation, is there an alternative role you think they could play? And the second part of my question is, do you think there are any specific metrics or outcomes that would best demonstrate that institutionally accredited DMS or DMSC programs are achieving Their goals for the profession and for patient care.
- [29:10]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
Yeah, thank you. There is a lot of work to be done and I think accrediting bodies who want to go through like a due diligence could help us, the consortium, gather research. Currently we have a program survey and we have an alumni survey. And we are trying to understand exactly what you just asked about in the second part of your question. What are these programs doing for our graduates? This research is, you know, takes collaborative effort across all of our programs. And we did, we have, you know, we've openly offered to share it with the AHRQ PA so that they can understand and start to kind of narrow in on, you know, what, narrow in on developing standards that would bring value, like Aisha was saying to these programs. Because I keep thinking of setting like stretch goals, like stretching us to be better. That's what I think of accreditation standards doing. And as they currently exist, these standards do not do that. And I think it's, it's logical. Like they were, they came about under a very fast timeline and they just, I don't think they reflect. I think they reflect that there's a gap in what we know about how to, how to do this in a standardized way across all the programs. So I think the, any accrediting body could help us gather research on this topic. There are some studies that talk about what a DMSC program does for its graduates and they mostly focus on self report data. Right. Which is always problematic because there's always this bias and social desirability. And, you know, how much do you trust that the data reflects like truly important outcomes? We can talk about compensation, which. There's two studies that currently suggest that DMSC training does, and DMS does lead to increased compensation. But this stuff needs to be validated on a larger scale and also longitudinally. And then we also need to control for all the differences among the programs in order to really decide what they do. But in terms of like, how do we know what DMSC programs are doing for the graduates, the patients they care for, the health systems that they work for? I think we need to do a bigger scale. We need to ask more people. It's very hard to get employers to answer surveys on this type of thing, but really that is where we're going to find out. Like what, what was the PA before they went to the DMSC training and how did their utility to the program or their ability to lead a team or their ability to create positive change in their clinic, how did all of that change and did the DMSC contribute to that? Of course. I suspect in all of my unbiased wisdom that there's going to be very positive outcomes. But in order to trust them, I think we need to go further than just self report data from the graduates, which is still important to gather, but we are gathering that. I think we need to see patient care outcomes. We need to see maybe PA education. Like, are we able to fill faculty roles? You know, are there enough doctorate trained PAs to fill faculty roles? So these are all the things there's still work to do and I think all of us would be happy to partner with accrediting bodies to do this.
- [32:18]
Unidentified Interviewer/Questioner
This has been such an interesting discussion regarding peer doctoral programs, and it sounds like there is a gap that needs to be filled with more research. So, looking to the future, what does, what does a healthy, thriving ecosystem of PA post professional doctorate looks like to you? And what advice would you give to a PA who is trying to decide whether a DMSC or the type of doctorate degree is, is the right next step given this evolving accreditation landscape? I know there's different pathways and we talk about DMSC, DMS, even PhD. So how would you guide PA in the post professional world?
- [32:57]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
For me, a healthy ecosystem is one where the degree matches the PA's, the essence of our unique mission. Right? We're going to directly serve the community and the needs of the community, but it should also match that student's professional goals. Right? The true value is not in the credential itself that you earn from this post professional degree. Rather, it's the knowledge that you get from the degree and the impact that you leave on the community with that knowledge. And so if you're a pa, listening and I had to offer you one piece of advice. If you want to be an entrepreneur or a researcher or a leader or an educator, start researching the programs that exist. And if you, you're not, if you're hitting walls, connect with your regional, state, national organizations, meet up with people, find a program that truly aligns with the impact that you want to make, and go for it. Carrie, it's all you.
- [33:48]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
Yeah, I'll just, I'll just add to that, I think, you know, just speaking personally, when I decided to get my doctorate, coincidentally, it was 2016, which is when Lincoln Memorial. Lincoln Memorial opened. I am not historically an early adopter, and honestly, I don't even remember if I knew about DMSC at the time because I was in the midst of, you know, applying for a PhD. But the truth is I really Wanted to do research. I kind of was insecure about research and statistics, and I was like, I gotta immerse myself in it. And so I wanted to do. I chose a PhD because I knew that it would just force me to take a ton of research classes and become more comfortable with it, which, of course, it did. Strangely, I. You know, I love this stuff now, but the truth is, now we have DMSC programs that are special, that are specializing in research. You know, because of the flexibility that institutional accreditation has afforded us, there has been an emergence of programs like Wake Forest University, which has an implementation research focus. So students who really want to hone their research skills can go there. We have University of Pittsburgh that has a QI focus, so quality improvement. Students who want to do that type of work in their hospitals can look for that. Northern Arizona University, which I know Dr. Harrison attended, has a healthcare delivery specialty, and they have experts in that field teaching in that program. Now we've got programs that are. Are focused on early career topics. We've got specialties like emergency preparedness, public health, healthcare leadership. So I think it's a great time to be honing in on what your next career move is. And I think you're going to be able to find a program, like Alicia said, that is well aligned with what makes you unique and more importantly, what unique contribution you want to make to your community.
- [35:40]
Unidentified Interviewer/Questioner
They can also reach out to. Joe, aren't you finishing your doctorate degree?
- [35:45]
Joe (Podcast Host)
I've already. I just finished. Yeah, exactly. See, that's right.
- [35:49]
Unidentified Interviewer/Questioner
So congratulations. And you'll be. They can ask you more questions if they want to go in the educator path.
- [35:55]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Yes, yes. And I. I definitely enjoyed getting my doctorate. Definitely. So, again, thank you guys for being here today. Thank you both, Carrie and Aisha, for the conversation and for advocating for PA education. Just before we wrap up, I give. I always give an opportunity. Do you have any final thoughts that you want to share before we wrap up?
- [36:16]
Dr. Carrie Bernard
I think I just want to want to say that I never could have imagined what I was able to accomplish with my doctorate. But it all started because I had this interest in burnout, and I wanted to learn more. And they'll say that, like, research is me searching. And so I would listen to that voice that's like that. That. And. And I can see a learn. I can see a motivated learner when I talk to them. It just. There's something about it that gets them excited, and that's really the motivation that you're gonna, number one, want to get through some of these programs. Cause it's, you know, it's not an easy endeavor. You still have to make space in your life for it. Um, but you wanna be, you know, just. You've got the wisdom inside of you to know what your right path is. So make sure to listen to that and don't be afraid to follow something that is really a personal passion.
- [37:05]
Dr. Aisha Hussain
I don't think I can match that. But I do want to say that I am forever grateful for the community that I have found myself in after pursuing my doctorate. There is. It's such a collaborative and healthy environment to be in. And I think a lot of people that are leaving the clinic, from burnout to this community, it's so refreshing because you're surrounded by people that support you. And for those that are going from the clinic because they love academia, kudos to you. And that's all I can offer tonight.
- [37:40]
Joe (Podcast Host)
Great. Thank you guys so much. Again, I think it was both very well said. Thank you so. And remember to our listeners, don't forget, listeners can now earn CME by listening to the podcast. To receive your CME credit and access your certificate, you just listen to the podcast, then complete the post test and evaluation in AAPA's Learning Central at cme.aapa.org until next time, thanks. Bye. Bye.