Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Review article: Biomedical intelligence

Vol. 146 No. 0506 (2016)

The “Profiles” document: a modern revision of the objectives of undergraduate medical studies in Switzerland

  • Pierre-André Michaud
  • Patrick Jucker-Kupper
  • The Profiles working group
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2016;146:w14270


The Joint Commission of the Swiss Medical Schools (SMIFK/CIMS) decided in 2000 to establish a Swiss Catalogue of Learning Objectives (SCLO) for undergraduate medical training, which was adapted from a similar Dutch blueprint. A second version of the SCLO was developed and launched in 2008. The catalogue is a prerequisite for the accreditation of the curricula of the six Swiss medical faculties and defines the contents of the Federal Licensing Examination (FLE). Given the evolution of the field of medicine and of medical education, the SMIFK/CIMS has decided to embark on a total revision of the SCLO. This article presents the proposed structure and content of Profiles, a new document which, in the future, will direct the format of undergraduate studies and of the FLE. Profiles stands for the Principal Relevant Objectives for Integrative Learning and Education in Switzerland. It is currently being developed by a group of experts from the six Swiss faculties as well as representatives of other institutions involved in these developments. The foundations of Profiles are grounded in the evolution of medical practice and of public health and are based on up-to-date teaching concepts, such as EPAs (entrustable professional activities). An introduction will cover the concepts and a tutorial will be displayed. Three main chapters will provide a description of the seven 2015 CanMEDS roles, a list of core EPAs and a series of ≈250 situations embracing the most frequent and current conditions affecting health. As Profiles is still a work in progress, it is hoped that this paper will attract the interest of all individuals involved in the training of medical students.


  1. Bloch R, Burgi H. The Swiss catalogue of learning objectives. Med Teach. 2002;24(2):144–50.
  2. Bürgi H, Rindlisbacher B, Bader Ch, Bloch R, Bosman F, et al. Swiss Catalogue of Learning Objectives for Undergraduate Medical Training. Bern: Working Group under a Mandate of the Joint Commission of the Swiss Medical Schools; 2008.
  3. Bhutta ZA, Chen L, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, Fineberg H, et al. Education of health professionals for the 21st century: a global independent Commission. Lancet. 2010;375(9721):1137–8.
  4. McNutt RA. Shared medical decision making: problems, process, progress. JAMA. 2004;292(20):2516–8.
  5. Lillie SE, Partin MR, Rice K, Fabbrini AE, Greer NL Patel SS, et al. The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Cancer Screening – A Systematic Review. Washington (DC): US Department of Veterans Affairs; 2014.
  6. Schwappach D, Gehring K. Quand le silence est dangereux. Bull Med Suisses. 2015;96:1351–4. French.
  7. Dumiak M. E-health’s future frontiers. Bull World Health Organ. 2012;90(5):328–9.
  8. Piette JD, Lun KC, Moura LA, Jr, Fraser HS, Mechael PN, Powell J, et al. Impacts of e-health on the outcomes of care in low- and middle-income countries: where do we go from here? Bull World Health Organ. 2012;90(5):365–72.
  9. Panahiazar M, Taslimitehrani V, Jadhav A, Pathak J. Empowering Personalized Medicine with Big Data and Semantic Web Technology: Promises, Challenges, and Use Cases. Proceedings: IEEE International Conference on Big Data IEEE International Conference on Big Data. 2014;2014:790–5.
  10. Federal Office of Public Health. Health 2020: global strategy. Bern; 2013.
  11. Haibach JP, Beehler GP, Dollar KM, Finnell DS. Moving toward integrated behavioral intervention for treating multimorbidity among chronic pain, depression, and substance-use disorders in primary care. Med care. 2014;52(4):322–7.
  12. Smith SM, Soubhi H, Fortin M, Hudon C, O’Dowd T. Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;4:CD006560.
  13. Smith SM, Soubhi H, Fortin M, Hudon C, O’Dowd T. Managing patients with multimorbidity: systematic review of interventions in primary care and community settings. BMJ. 2012;345:e5205.
  14. Hawkes N. New models of healthcare will replace nearly three quarters of NHS by 2024, report says. BMJ. 2014;348:g4088.
  15. Thomas L, Galla C. Building a culture of safety through team training and engagement. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22(5):425–34.
  16. Wright ES. Biomedical models and healthcare systems: new model will be useful if it alters allocation of resources. BMJ. 2005;330(7488):419.
  17. Corrigan P, Parish M. Going with change: Allowing new models of healthcare to be provided for NHS patients. London: Reform; 2014.
  18. Doukas DJ, Kirch DG, Brigham TP, Barzansky BM, Wear S, Carrese JA, et al. Transforming educational accountability in medical ethics and humanities education toward professionalism. Acad Med. 2015;90(6):738–43.
  19. Eikelboom JI, ten Cate OT, Jaarsma D, Raat JA, Schuwirth L, van Delden JJ. A framework for the ethics review of education research. Med Educ. 2012;46(8):731–3.
  20. Wynia MK, Papadakis MA, Sullivan WM, Hafferty FW. More than a list of values and desired behaviors: a foundational understanding of medical professionalism. Acad Med. 2014;89(5):712–4.
  21. Asch D, Weinstein D F. Innovation in Medical Education. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:794–5.
  22. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287(2):226–35.
  23. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010;376(9756):1923–58.
  24. Neville AJ, Norman GR. PBL in the undergraduate MD program at McMaster University: three iterations in three decades. Acad Med. 2007;82(4):370–4.
  25. Biggs J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education. 1996;32:347–64.
  26. Reeves S, Fox A, Hodges BD. The competency movement in the health professions: ensuring consistent standards or reproducing conventional domains of practice? Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice. 2009;14(4):451–3.
  27. Schuwirth L, Cantillon P. The need for outcome measures in medical education. BMJ. 2005;977 977.
  28. Shumway JM, Harden RM, Association for Medical Education in E. AMEE Guide No. 25: The assessment of learning outcomes for the competent and reflective physician. Med Teach. 2003;25(6):569–84.
  29. Hawkins R, Welcher C, Holmboe E, et al. Implementation of competency-based medical education: are we addressing the concerns and challenges? Med Educ. 2015;49:1086–102.
  30. Frank J, Snell L, ten Cate O. Competency-based medical education: theory to practice. Med Teach. 2010;32:638–45.
  31. Frank JE. The CanMEDS 2005 physician competency framework. Better standards. Better physicians. Better care. Ottawa: Office of Education, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2005.
  32. Hurtubise L, Roman B. Competency-based curricular design to encourage significant learning. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2014;44(6):164–9.
  33. Ten Cate O, Billett S. Competency-based medical education: origins, perspectives and potentialities. Med Educ. 2014;48(3):325–32.
  34. Tekian A, Hodges BD, Roberts TE, Schuwirt L, Norcini J. Assessing competencies using milestones along the way. Med Teach. 2015;37:399–402.
  35. Association of American Medical Colleges. Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency. Washington DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; 2014.
  36. Chen HC, van den Broek WE, ten Cate O. The case for use of entrustable professional activities in undergraduate medical education. Acad Med. 2015;90(4):431–6.
  37. Hauer KE, Soni K, Cornett P, et al. Developing entrustable professional activities as the basis for assessment of competence in an internal medicine residency: a feasibility study. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(8):1110–4.
  38. Ten Cate O C, HC, Hoff R, Peters H, Bok H, Van der Schaaf M. Curriculum development for the workplace using Entrustable Professional Activities (AMEE guide). Med Teach. 2015:1–20.
  39. Chen HC, McNamara M, Teherani A, Cate OT, O’Sullivan P. Developing Entrustable Professional Activities for Entry Into Clerkship. Acad Med. 2015 Nov 9.
  40. Ten Cate O, Chen HC, Hoff RG, Peters H, Bok H, van der Schaaf M. Curriculum development for the workplace using Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs): AMEE Guide No. 99. Med Teach. 2015:1–20.
  41. Ten Cate O, Scheele F. Competency-based postgraduate training: can we bridge the gap between theory and clinical practice? Acad Med. 2007;82(6):542–7.
  42. Ten Cate O. Nuts and Bolts of Entrustable Professional Activities. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5:157–8.
  43. Englander R, Carraccio C. From theory to practice: making entrustable professional activities come to life in the context of milestones. Acad Med. 2014;89:1321–3.
  44. ten Cate O, Young JQ. The patient handover as an entrustable professional activity: adding meaning in teaching and practice. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(Suppl 1):i9–12.
  45. General Medical Council. Tomorrow’s Doctors. Outcomes and standards for undergraduate medical education. Manchester; 2009.
  46. Pearson DJ, McKinley RK. Why tomorrow’s doctors need primary care today. J R Soc Med. 2010;103(1):9–13.
  47. Ten Cate O. What is a 21st-century doctor? Rethinking the significance of the medical degree. Acad Med. 2014;89(7):966–9.
  48. Cumming A, Ross M. The Tuning Project: Outcomes/ Competences for Undergraduate Medical Education in Europe. Edinburgh: European Community; 2008.
  49. van Herwaarden CLA, Laan RFJM, Leunissen RRM. The 2009 Framework for Undergraduate Medical Education in the Netherlands. Utrecht: Dutch Federation of University Medical Centres; 2009.
  50. The Medical Council of Canada. Objectives for the qualifying examination. Calgary: The Medical Council of Canada; 2005.

Most read articles by the same author(s)