Abstract:We have recently published the experience of the accreditation body of undergraduate medical education in Iran on developing and validating standards based on the WFME framework (Gandomkar et al., BMC Med Educ 23:379, 2023). Agabagheri et al. extended our work and proposed a blueprint for post-accreditation monitoring based on their experience in developing an official guide in their Matters Arising (Aghabagheri et al., BMC Med Educ). The authors have used post-accreditation monitoring as a process of monitoring and controlling accreditation activities, procedures often referred to as meta-evaluation or meta-accreditation (depending on the objectives of evaluation) in the literature. On the contrary, post-accreditation monitoring alludes to the process of continuous quality improvement of educational programs after accreditation. We would like to make clarifications between post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation which have been used interchangeably in their paper. Considering the emerging interests in scholarship and non-scholarship activities and reports in undergraduate medical education accreditation, this clarification provides a better understanding of the roles of these crucial concepts in the accreditation process.

Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation