Search

Objectives: Clinical academics lead research to deliver medical advancements while also teaching in medical schools to maintain high-quality medical services. The objective of this project was to determine if there is a sufficient supply of clinical academics for UK medical schools., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Data were extracted from the UK Medical Education Database and the General Medical Council (GMC) annual National Trainee Survey between 2012 and 2022., Participants: 1769 registered UK doctors with academic training and a certificate of completion of training., Main Outcome Measure: The percentage of doctors with clinical and academic training who ended up as incumbent clinical academics at UK medical schools., Results: Approximately 50% of doctors with clinical and academic training were matched as incumbent clinical academics at UK medical schools. There was a low annual rate of incumbent clinical academics leaving their post., Conclusion: Either clinical academic trainees do not find jobs at medical schools, or they do not want the jobs that are available. These results are indicative but not conclusive as generalisation is compromised by inconsistent disclosure of data by medical schools. We discuss variables which may contribute to the loss of clinical academics and explore the health economic case for clinical academic incentive packages to improve return on training investment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: An impoverished medical workforce is a global phenomenon, which can impact patient care significantly. Greater flexibility in working patterns is one approach policy-makers adopt to address this issue, and the expansion of less than full-time (LTFT) working forms part of this. Studies suggest that LTFT working has the potential to improve recruitment and retention by aligning with how doctors increasingly want to balance their careers with other commitments and interests. What is less well understood are the influencing factors and outcomes related to LTFT working among doctors. This protocol outlines the methodology for a systematic review that will evaluate existing knowledge on LTFT working in the medical profession., Methods and Analysis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines will be followed. Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Health Management Information Consortium, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Healthcare Administration, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts will be searched for studies published up to March 2022. Unpublished literature from EThos and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global will also be searched. Bibliographic searching, citation searching and handsearching will be used to retrieve additional papers. Authors will be contacted for data or publications if necessary. Two independent reviewers will undertake study screening, data extraction and quality assessment, with disagreements resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer if necessary. Data synthesis will be by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis if possible., Ethics and Dissemination: The proposed study does not require ethical approval; however, it forms part of a larger body of research on the impact of LTFT working on the medical workforce for which ethics approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Committee at University College London. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at national and international conferences., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022307174., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To evaluate the status of UK undergraduate urology teaching against the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Undergraduate Syllabus for Urology. Secondary objectives included evaluating the type and quantity of teaching provided, the reported performance rate of General Medical Council (GMC)-mandated urological procedures, and the proportion of undergraduates considering urology as a career., Materials and Methods: LEARN was a national multicentre cross-sectional study. Year 2 to Year 5 medical students and FY1 doctors were invited to complete a survey between 3 rd October and 20 th December 2020, retrospectively assessing the urology teaching received to date. Results are reported according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)., Results: 7,063/8,346 (84.6%) responses from all 39 UK medical schools were included; 1,127/7,063 (16.0%) were from Foundation Year (FY) 1 doctors, who reported that the most frequently taught topics in undergraduate training were on urinary tract infection (96.5%), acute kidney injury (95.9%) and haematuria (94.4%). The most infrequently taught topics were male urinary incontinence (59.4%), male infertility (52.4%) and erectile dysfunction (43.8%). Male and female catheterisation on patients as undergraduates was performed by 92.1% and 73.0% of FY1 doctors respectively, and 16.9% had considered a career in urology. Theory based teaching was mainly prevalent in the early years of medical school, with clinical skills teaching, and clinical placements in the later years of medical school. 20.1% of FY1 doctors reported no undergraduate clinical attachment in urology., Conclusion: LEARN is the largest ever evaluation of undergraduate urology teaching. In the UK, teaching seemed satisfactory as evaluated by the BAUS undergraduate syllabus. However, many students report having no clinical attachments in Urology and some newly qualified doctors report never having inserted a catheter, which is a GMC mandated requirement. We recommend a greater emphasis on undergraduate clinical exposure to urology and stricter adherence to GMC mandated procedures., (This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To identify differences in average basic pay between groups of National Health Service (NHS) doctors cross-classified by ethnicity and gender. Analyse the extent to which characteristics (grade, specialty, age, hours, etc.) can explain these differences., Design: Retrospective observational study using repeated cross-section design., Setting: Hospital and Community Health Service (HCHS) in England., Participants: All HCHS doctors in England employed by the NHS between 2016 and 2020 appearing in the Digital Electronic Staff Record dataset (average N=99 953 per year)., Main Outcome Measures: Hours-adjusted full-time equivalent pay gaps; given as raw data and further adjusted for demographic, job, and workplace characteristics (such as grade, specialty, age, whether British nationality, region) using multivariable regression and statistical decomposition techniques., Results: Pay gaps relative to white men vary with the ethnicity-gender combination. Indian men slightly out-earn white men and Bangladeshi women have a 40% pay gap. In most cases, pay gaps can largely be explained by characteristics that can be measured, especially grade, with the extent varying by specific ethnicity-gender group. However, a portion of pay gaps cannot be explained by characteristics that can be measured., Conclusions: This study presents new evidence on ethnicity-gender pay gaps among NHS doctors in England using high quality administrative and payroll data. The findings indicate all ethnicity-gender groups earn less than white men on average, except for Indian men. In some cases, these differences cannot be explained giving rise to discussions about the role of discrimination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: New consultants consistently feel better prepared for the clinical rather than non-clinical aspects of their role. However, deficiencies in generic competencies have been linked to burnout and patient complaints. This study explored how higher specialty training prepares doctors for the transition to consultant in genitourinary medicine., Results: New consultants felt less prepared for non-clinical aspects of their role. Prior practical experience was the greatest influencing factor in levels of preparedness, with increased responsibility and leadership driving deeper learning. Observation of others helped individuals develop a professional identity but also learn about the wider processes within their service. The learning environment positively influenced preparedness but highlighted a need for dedicated time to learn non-clinical aspects., Conclusion: To ensure future trainees feel prepared for the non-clinical aspects of the consultant role, practical experience of non-clinical areas with high levels of leadership and responsibility within a supportive learning environment is essential., (© Royal College of Physicians 2020. All rights reserved.)

Background: Tests of competence are written and clinical assessments taken by doctors under investigation by the General Medical Council (GMC) who have significant performance concerns. Male doctors on average perform more poorly in clinical assessments than female doctors, and are more likely to be sanctioned. It is unclear why., Aim: To examine sex differences in the tests of competence assessment scores of GPs under investigation by the GMC, compared with GPs not under investigation, and whether scores mediate any relationship between sex and sanction likelihood., Design and Setting: Retrospective cohort study of GPs' administrative tests of competence data., Method: Analysis of variance was undertaken to compare written and clinical tests of competence performance by sex and GP group (under investigation versus volunteers). Path analysis was conducted to explore the relationship between sex, written and clinical tests of competence performance, and investigation outcome., Results: On the written test, female GPs under investigation outperformed male GPs under investigation (Cohen's d = 0.28, P = 0.01); there was no sex difference in the volunteer group (Cohen's d = 0.02, P = 0.93). On the clinical assessment, female GPs outperformed male GPs in both groups (Cohen's d = 0.61, P <0.0001). A higher clinical score predicted remaining on the UK medical register without a warning or sanction, with no independent effect of sex controlling for assessment performance., Conclusion: Female GPs outperform male GPs on clinical assessments, even among GPs with generally very poor performance. Male GPs under investigation may have particularly poor knowledge. Further research is required to understand potential sex differences in doctors who take tests of competence and how these impact on sex differences in investigation outcomes., (© British Journal of General Practice 2019.)

Background: There is much discussion about the sex differences that exist in medical education. Research from the United Kingdom (UK) and United States has found female doctors earn less, and are less likely to be senior authors on academic papers, but female doctors are also less likely to be sanctioned, and have been found to perform better academically and clinically. It is also known that international medical graduates tend to perform more poorly academically compared to home-trained graduates in the UK, US, and Canada. It is uncertain whether the magnitude and direction of sex differences in doctors' performance is variable by country. We explored the association between doctors' sex and their performance at a large international high-stakes clinical examination: the Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (UK) Practical Assessment of Clinical Examination Skills (PACES). We examined how sex differences varied by the country in which the doctor received their primary medical qualification, the country in which they took the PACES examination, and by the country in which they are registered to practise., Methods: Seven thousand six hundred seventy-one doctors attempted PACES between October 2010 and May 2013. We analysed sex differences in first time pass rates, controlling for ethnicity, in three groups: (i) UK medical graduates (N = 3574); (ii) non-UK medical graduates registered with the UK medical regulator, the General Medical Council (GMC), and thus likely to be working in the UK (N = 1067); and (iii) non-UK medical graduates without GMC registration and so legally unable to work or train in the UK (N = 2179)., Results: Female doctors were statistically significantly more likely to pass at their first attempt in all three groups, with the greatest sex effect seen in non-UK medical graduates without GMC registration (OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.65-2.39; P < 0.0001) and the smallest in the UK graduates (OR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.03-1.35; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: As found in a previous format of this examination and in other clinical examinations, female doctors outperformed male doctors. Further work is required to explore why sex differences were greater in non-UK graduates, especially those without GMC registration, and to consider how examination performance may relate to performance in practice.

A structured online survey was used to establish the views of 2,684 practising clinicians of all ages in multiple countries about the value of the physical examination in the contemporary practice of internal medicine. 70% felt that physical examination was 'almost always valuable' in acute general medical referrals. 66% of trainees felt that they were never observed by a consultant when undertaking physical examination and 31% that consultants never demonstrated their use of the physical examination to them. Auscultation for pulmonary wheezes and crackles were the two signs most likely to be rated as frequently used and useful, with the character of the jugular venous waveform most likely to be rated as -infrequently used and not useful. Physicians in contemporary hospital general medical practice continue to value the contribution of the physical examination to assessment of outpatients and inpatients, but, in the opinion of trainees, teaching and demonstration could be improved., (© Royal College of Physicians 2017. All rights reserved.)

Background: International Medical Graduates (IMGs) are known to perform less well in many postgraduate medical examinations when compared to their UK trained counterparts. This "differential attainment" is observed in both knowledge-based and clinical skills assessments. This study explored the influence of culture and language on IMGs clinical communication skills, in particular, their ability to seek, detect and acknowledge patients' concerns in a high stakes postgraduate clinical skills examination. Hofstede's cultural dimensions framework was used to look at the impact of culture on examination performance., Methods: This was a qualitative, interpretative study using thematic content analysis of video-recorded doctor-simulated patient consultations of candidates sitting the MRCP(UK) PACES examination, at a single examination centre in November 2012. The research utilised Hofstede's cultural dimension theory, a framework for comparing cultural factors amongst different nations, to help understand the reasons for failure., Results: Five key themes accounted for the majority of communication failures in station 2, "history taking" and station 4, "communication skills and ethics" of the MRCP(UK) PACES examination. Two themes, the ability to detect clues and the ability to address concerns, related directly to the overall construct managing patients' concerns. Three other themes were found to impact the whole consultation. These were building relationships, providing structure and explanation and planning., Conclusion: Hofstede's cultural dimensions may help to contextualise some of these observations. In some cultures doctor and patient roles are relatively inflexible: the doctor may convey less information to the patient (higher power distance societies) and give less attention to building rapport (high uncertainty avoidance societies.) This may explain why cues and concerns presented by patients were overlooked in this setting. Understanding cultural differences through Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory can inform the preparation of candidates for high stakes bedside clinical skills examinations and for professional practice.

Background: The relationship between male sex and poor performance in doctors remains unclear, with high profile studies showing conflicting results. Nevertheless, it is an important first step towards understanding the causes of poor performance in doctors. This article aims to establish the robustness of the association between male sex and poor performance in doctors, internationally and over time., Methods: The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to January 2015. Backward and forward citation searching was performed. Journals that yielded the majority of the eligible articles and journals in the medical education field were electronically searched, along with the conference and poster abstracts from two of the largest international medical education conferences. Studies reporting original data, written in English or French, examining the association between sex and medico-legal action against doctors were included. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and outcome data from the full texts of the studies meeting the eligibility criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random effect meta-analysis model was used to summarize and assess the effect of doctors' sex on medico-legal action. Extracted outcomes included disciplinary action by a medical regulatory board, malpractice experience, referral to a medical regulatory body, complaints received by a healthcare complaints body, criminal cases, and medico-legal matter with a medical defence organisation., Results: Overall, 32 reports examining the association between doctors' sex and medico-legal action were included in the systematic review (n=4,054,551), of which 27 found that male doctors were more likely to have experienced medico-legal action. 19 reports were included in the meta-analysis (n=3,794,486, including 20,666 cases). Results showed male doctors had nearly two and a half times the odds of being subject to medico-legal action than female doctors. Heterogeneity was present in all meta-analyses., Conclusion: Male doctors are more likely to have had experienced medico-legal actions compared to female doctors. This finding is robust internationally, across outcomes of varying severity, and over time.

Background: The General Medical Council's Fitness to Practise investigations may involve a test of competence for doctors with performance concerns. Concern has been raised about the suitability of the test format for doctors who qualified before the introduction of Single Best Answer and Objective Structured Clinical Examination assessments, both of which form the test of competence. This study explored whether the examination formats used in the tests of competence are fair to long standing doctors who have undergone fitness to practise investigation., Methods: A retrospective cohort design was used to determine an association between year of primary medical qualification and doctors' test of competence performance. Performance of 95 general practitioners under investigation was compared with a group of 376 volunteer doctors. We analysed performance on knowledge test, OSCE overall, and three individual OSCE stations using Spearman's correlation and regression models., Results: Doctors under investigation performed worse on all test outcomes compared to the comparison group. Qualification year correlated positively with performance on all outcomes except for physical examination (e.g. knowledge test r = 0.48, p < 0.001 and OSCE r = 0.37, p < 0.001). Qualification year was associated with test performance in doctors under investigation even when controlling for sex, ethnicity and qualification region. Regression analyses showed that qualification year was associated with knowledge test, OSCE and communication skills performance of doctors under investigation when other variables were controlled for. Among volunteer doctors this was not the case and their performance was more strongly related to where they qualified and their ethnic background. Furthermore, volunteer doctors who qualified before the introduction of Single Best Answer and OSCE assessments, still outperformed their peers under investigation., Conclusions: Earlier graduates under fitness to practise investigation performed less well on the test of competence than their more recently qualified peers under investigation. The performance of the comparator group tended to stay consistent irrespective of year qualified. Our results suggest that the test format does not disadvantage early qualified doctors. We discuss findings in relation to the GMC's fitness to practise procedures and suggest alternative explanations for the poorer performance of long standing doctors under investigation.

Background: MRCGP and MRCP(UK) are the main entry qualifications for UK doctors entering general [family] practice or hospital [internal] medicine. The performance of MRCP(UK) candidates who subsequently take MRCGP allows validation of each assessment. In the UK, underperformance of ethnic minority doctors taking MRCGP has had a high political profile, with a Judicial Review in the High Court in April 2014 for alleged racial discrimination. Although the legal challenge was dismissed, substantial performance differences between white and BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) doctors undoubtedly exist. Understanding ethnic differences can be helped by comparing the performance of doctors who take both MRCGP and MRCP(UK)., Methods: We identified 2,284 candidates who had taken one or more parts of both assessments, MRCP(UK) typically being taken 3.7 years before MRCGP. We analyzed performance on knowledge-based MCQs (MRCP(UK) Parts 1 and 2 and MRCGP Applied Knowledge Test (AKT)) and clinical examinations (MRCGP Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) and MRCP(UK) Practical Assessment of Clinical Skills (PACES))., Results: Correlations between MRCGP and MRCP(UK) were high, disattenuated correlations for MRCGP AKT with MRCP(UK) Parts 1 and 2 being 0.748 and 0.698, and for CSA and PACES being 0.636. BME candidates performed less well on all five assessments (P < .001). Correlations disaggregated by ethnicity were complex, MRCGP AKT showing similar correlations with Part1/Part2/PACES in White and BME candidates, but CSA showing stronger correlations with Part1/Part2/PACES in BME candidates than in White candidates. CSA changed its scoring method during the study; multiple regression showed the newer CSA was better predicted by PACES than the previous CSA., Conclusions: High correlations between MRCGP and MRCP(UK) support the validity of each, suggesting they assess knowledge cognate to both assessments. Detailed analyses by candidate ethnicity show that although White candidates out-perform BME candidates, the differences are largely mirrored across the two examinations. Whilst the reason for the differential performance is unclear, the similarity of the effects in independent knowledge and clinical examinations suggests the differences are unlikely to result from specific features of either assessment and most likely represent true differences in ability.

Background: Doctors who are investigated by the General Medical Council for performance concerns may be required to take a Test of Competence (ToC). The tests are piloted on volunteer doctors before they are used in Fitness to Practise (FtP) investigations., Objectives: To find out who volunteers to take a pilot ToC and why., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. Between February 2011 and October 2012 we asked doctors who volunteered for a test to complete a questionnaire about their reasons for volunteering and recruitment. We analysed the data using descriptive statistics and Pearson's χ(2) test., Results: 301 doctors completed the questionnaire. Doctors who took a ToC voluntarily were mostly women, of white ethnicity, of junior grades, working in general practice and who held a Primary Medical Qualification (PMQ) from the UK. This was a different population to doctors under investigation and all registered doctors in the UK. Most volunteers heard about the General Medical Council's pilot events through email from a colleague and used the experience to gain exam practice for forthcoming postgraduate exams., Conclusions: The reference groups of volunteers are not representative of doctors under FtP investigation. Our findings will be used to inform future recruitment strategies with the aim to encourage better matching of groups who voluntarily pilot a ToC with those under FtP investigation., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

The medical profession is global, and ambitious trainee physicians around the world are eager to attain internationally recognised postgraduate medical qualifications. The MRCP(UK) and specialty certificate examinations of the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom provide such qualifications, and between 2002 and 2013, the number of international candidates attempting these examinations grew substantially. Delivering these proven and reliable UK-based examinations in other countries has many local benefits: it enhances careers, strengthens medical training and improves standards of patient care. In collaboration with international colleagues, the Federation is committed to continued growth that extends these benefits to all physicians, wherever they work and live., (© 2014 Royal College of Physicians.)

Objectives: To examine the association between doctors' sex and receiving sanctions on their medical registration, while controlling for other potentially confounding variables., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: The General Medical Council (GMC)'s List of Registered Medical Practitioners (LRMP) database of doctors practising in the UK., Population: All doctors on the GMC's LRMP on 29 May 2013. The database included all doctors who are or have been registered to practise medicine in the UK since October 2005. The exposure of interest was doctor's sex. Confounding variables included years since primary medical qualification, world region of primary medical qualification and specialty., Outcome Measures: Sanctions on a doctor's medical registration. Sanction types included warnings, undertakings, conditions, suspension or erasure from the register. Binary logistic regression modelling, controlling for confounders, described the association between the doctor's sex and sanctions on a doctor's medical registration., Results: Of the 329,542 doctors on the LRMP, 2697 (0.8%) had sanctions against their registration, 516 (19.1%) of whom were female. In the fully adjusted model, female doctors had nearly a third of the odds (OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.41) of having sanctions compared to male doctors. There was evidence that the association varies with specialty, with female doctors who had specialised as general practitioners being the least likely to receive sanctions compared with their male colleagues (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.31)., Conclusions: Female doctors have reduced odds of receiving sanctions on their medical registration when compared with their male colleagues. This association remained after adjustment for the confounding factors. These results are representative of all doctors registered to practise in the UK. Further exploration of why doctors' sex may impact their professional performance is underway., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objective: To investigate how accurately doctors estimated their performance on the General Medical Council's Tests of Competence pilot examinations., Design: A cross-sectional survey design using a questionnaire method., Setting: University College London Medical School., Participants: 524 medical doctors working in a range of clinical specialties between foundation year two and consultant level., Main Outcome Measures: Estimated and actual total scores on a knowledge test and Observed Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)., Results: The pattern of results for OSCE performance differed from the results for knowledge test performance. The majority of doctors significantly underestimated their OSCE performance. Whereas estimated knowledge test performance differed between high and low performers. Those who did particularly well significantly underestimated their knowledge test performance (t (196)=-7.70, p<0.01) and those who did less well significantly overestimated (t (172)=6.09, p<0.01). There were also significant differences between estimated and/or actual performance by gender, ethnicity and region of Primary Medical Qualification., Conclusions: Doctors were more accurate in predicating their knowledge test performance than their OSCE performance. The association between estimated and actual knowledge test performance supports the established differences between high and low performers described in the behavioural sciences literature. This was not the case for the OSCE. The implications of the results to the revalidation process are discussed.

Medical education is vital to the future of healthcare provision. It is also expensive. We should ensure that the funding spent on medical education is spent in the most cost-effective way possible and delivers the best possible returns on our investment. Budgets that have been allocated to medical education should be spent on this and not on research or clinical care. Educational budgets should be transparent - so that their use and misuse are clear. We should develop a culture of lifelong learning and continually make explicit that future healthcare professionals need investment in their education to maintain the quality and safety of healthcare delivery.

Background: Selection of medical students in the UK is still largely based on prior academic achievement, although doubts have been expressed as to whether performance in earlier life is predictive of outcomes later in medical school or post-graduate education. This study analyses data from five longitudinal studies of UK medical students and doctors from the early 1970s until the early 2000s. Two of the studies used the AH5, a group test of general intelligence (that is, intellectual aptitude). Sex and ethnic differences were also analyzed in light of the changing demographics of medical students over the past decades., Methods: Data from five cohort studies were available: the Westminster Study (began clinical studies from 1975 to 1982), the 1980, 1985, and 1990 cohort studies (entered medical school in 1981, 1986, and 1991), and the University College London Medical School (UCLMS) Cohort Study (entered clinical studies in 2005 and 2006). Different studies had different outcome measures, but most had performance on basic medical sciences and clinical examinations at medical school, performance in Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (MRCP(UK)) examinations, and being on the General Medical Council Specialist Register., Results: Correlation matrices and path analyses are presented. There were robust correlations across different years at medical school, and medical school performance also predicted MRCP(UK) performance and being on the GMC Specialist Register. A-levels correlated somewhat less with undergraduate and post-graduate performance, but there was restriction of range in entrants. General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE)/O-level results also predicted undergraduate and post-graduate outcomes, but less so than did A-level results, but there may be incremental validity for clinical and post-graduate performance. The AH5 had some significant correlations with outcome, but they were inconsistent. Sex and ethnicity also had predictive effects on measures of educational attainment, undergraduate, and post-graduate performance. Women performed better in assessments but were less likely to be on the Specialist Register. Non-white participants generally underperformed in undergraduate and post-graduate assessments, but were equally likely to be on the Specialist Register. There was a suggestion of smaller ethnicity effects in earlier studies., Conclusions: The existence of the Academic Backbone concept is strongly supported, with attainment at secondary school predicting performance in undergraduate and post-graduate medical assessments, and the effects spanning many years. The Academic Backbone is conceptualized in terms of the development of more sophisticated underlying structures of knowledge ('cognitive capital' and 'medical capital'). The Academic Backbone provides strong support for using measures of educational attainment, particularly A-levels, in student selection.

Background: Bias of clinical examiners against some types of candidate, based on characteristics such as sex or ethnicity, would represent a threat to the validity of an examination, since sex or ethnicity are 'construct-irrelevant' characteristics. In this paper we report a novel method for assessing sex and ethnic bias in over 2000 examiners who had taken part in the PACES and nPACES (new PACES) examinations of the MRCP(UK)., Method: PACES and nPACES are clinical skills examinations that have two examiners at each station who mark candidates independently. Differences between examiners cannot be due to differences in performance of a candidate because that is the same for the two examiners, and hence may result from bias or unreliability on the part of the examiners. By comparing each examiner against a 'basket' of all of their co-examiners, it is possible to identify examiners whose behaviour is anomalous. The method assessed hawkishness-doveishness, sex bias, ethnic bias and, as a control condition to assess the statistical method, 'even-number bias' (i.e. treating candidates with odd and even exam numbers differently). Significance levels were Bonferroni corrected because of the large number of examiners being considered., Results: The results of 26 diets of PACES and six diets of nPACES were examined statistically to assess the extent of hawkishness, as well as sex bias and ethnicity bias in individual examiners. The control (odd-number) condition suggested that about 5% of examiners were significant at an (uncorrected) 5% level, and that the method therefore worked as expected. As in a previous study (BMC Medical Education, 2006, 6:42), some examiners were hawkish or doveish relative to their peers. No examiners showed significant sex bias, and only a single examiner showed evidence consistent with ethnic bias. A re-analysis of the data considering only one examiner per station, as would be the case for many clinical examinations, showed that analysis with a single examiner runs a serious risk of false positive identifications probably due to differences in case-mix and content-specificity., Conclusions: In examinations where there are two independent examiners at a station, our method can assess the extent of bias against candidates with particular characteristics. The method would be far less sensitive in examinations with only a single examiner per station as examiner variance would be confounded with candidate performance variance. The method however works well when there is more than one examiner at a station and in the case of the current MRCP(UK) clinical examination, nPACES, found possible sex bias in no examiners and possible ethnic bias in only one.

Background: UK-trained medical students and doctors from minority ethnic groups underperform academically. It is unclear why this problem exists, which makes it difficult to know how to address it., Aim: To investigate whether demographic and psychological factors mediate the relationship between ethnicity and final examination scores., Sample: Two consecutive cohorts of Year 5 (final year) UCL Medical School students (n= 703; 51% minority ethnic). A total of 587 (83%) had previously completed a questionnaire in Year 3., Methods: Participants were administered a questionnaire in 2005 and 2006 that included a short version of the NEO-PI-R, the Study Process Questionnaire, and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) as well as socio-demographic measures. Participants were then followed up to final year (2007-2010). White and minority ethnic students' questionnaire responses and final examination grades were compared using univariate tests. The effect of ethnicity on final year grades after taking into account the questionnaire variables was calculated using hierarchical multiple linear regression., Results: Univariate ethnic differences were found on age, personality, learning styles, living at home, first language, parental factors, and prior education. Minority ethnic students had lower final exam scores, were more likely to fail, and less likely to achieve a merit or distinction in finals. Multivariate analyses showed ethnicity predicted final exam scores even after taking into account questionnaire factors., Conclusions: Ethnic differences in the final year performance of two cohorts of UCL medical students were not due to differences in psychological or demographic factors, which suggests alternative explanations are responsible for the ethnic attainment gap in medicine., (© 2011 The British Psychological Society.)

As a consequence of change in medical, educational and regulatory practice, MRCP(UK) successfully modified the international PACES examination in 2009. This brief paper explains the rationale for change and summarises the development and implementation process.

The MRCP(UK) PACES examination has been sat by almost 40,000 candidates in 10 countries around the world since its introduction in 2001. The examination assesses skills of relevance to the practice and delivery of high quality clinical care and is the leading international postgraduate summative assessment of this kind. In 2009, the examination was revised, and this article describes those revisions, focussing on the clinical skills assessed.

It is now clear that women doctors will soon make up the majority of the medical workforce. Research shows that women often prefer part time and flexible working, and are inclined to favour some specialist fields over others. Although these facts are widely known, as yet it appears that little account has been taken of their economic and organisational consequences. All doctors require sound careers advice, but women doctors reported that this is often poor or inconsistent. Women's preference for flexible working at certain stages of their careers could be a major advantage in health service planning; models need to be developed that recognise women's willingness to work in new ways. Although women are under-represented in positions of national leadership, there is no evidence to suggest that they are disadvantaged in their endeavours, or unwilling to deliver the commitment necessary. However, they may need timely advice and encouragement to reach their full potential.

Background: The UK General Medical Council (GMC) in its regulatory capacity conducts formal tests of competence (TOCs) on doctors whose performance is of concern. TOCs are individually tailored to each doctor's specialty and grade., Aims: To describe the development and implementation of an electronic blueprinting system that supports the delivery of TOCs., Method: A case study that describes the evolution of the GMC electronic blueprint including the derivation of its content and its functionality., Results: A question bank has been created with all items classified according to the competencies defined by Good Medical Practice. This database aids test assembly and ensures that each assessment maps across the breadth of the blueprint., Conclusions: The blueprint described was easy to construct and is easy to use. It reflects the knowledge, skills and behaviours (learning outcomes) to be assessed. It guides commissioning of test material and enables the systematic and faithful sampling of common and important problems. The principles described have potential for wider application to blueprinting in undergraduate or clinical training programmes. Such a blueprint can provide the essential link between a curriculum and its assessment system and ensure that assessment content is stable over time.

The practice of clinical medicine is becoming increasingly specialized, and this change has increased the challenge of developing fair, valid, and reliable tests of knowledge, particularly for single candidates or small groups of candidates. The problem is particularly relevant to the UK's General Medical Council's Fitness to Practice procedures, which investigate individual doctors. In such cases, there is a need for an alternative to the conventional approach to reliability estimation that will still allow the delivery of reproducible and standardized tests. This report describes the three-year process (starting in 2005) of developing a knowledge test that can be tailored for individual doctors practicing in narrowly specialized fields or at various stages in their training. The process of test development for this study consisted of five stages: item writing, to create individual questions; blueprinting, to establish the content and context that each item might test; standard setting, to calculate for each question a theoretical probability that a doctor of just-adequate capability would answer the question correctly; reference data collection, to determine for each item the distribution of scores to be expected from a large population of doctors in good standing; and test assembly, to select sets of questions that together formed complete and balanced tests. Tailored testing is a valid, feasible, and reproducible method of assessing the knowledge of one doctor or small groups of doctors who are practicing in narrow or subspecialty areas.

Background: Ethnic minority (EM) medical students and doctors underperform academically, but little evidence exists on how to ameliorate the problem. Psychologists Cohen et al. recently demonstrated that a written self-affirmation intervention substantially improved EM adolescents' school grades several months later. Cohen et al.'s methods were replicated in the different setting of UK undergraduate medical education., Methods: All 348 Year 3 white (W) and EM students at one UK medical school were randomly allocated to an intervention condition (writing about one's own values) or a control condition (writing about another's values), via their tutor group. Students and assessors were blind to the existence of the study. Group comparisons on post-intervention written and OSCE (clinical) assessment scores adjusted for baseline written assessment scores were made using two-way analysis of covariance. All assessment scores were transformed to z-scores (mean = 0 standard deviation = 1) for ease of comparison. Comparisons between types of words used in essays were calculated using t-tests. The study was covered by University Ethics Committee guidelines., Results: Groups were statistically identical at baseline on demographic and psychological factors, and analysis was by intention to treat [intervention group EM n = 95, W n = 79; control group EM n = 77; W n = 84]. As predicted, there was a significant ethnicity by intervention interaction [F(4,334) = 5.74; p = 0.017] on the written assessment. Unexpectedly, this was due to decreased scores in the W intervention group [mean difference = 0.283; (95% CI = 0.093 to 0.474] not improved EM intervention group scores [mean difference = -0.060 (95% CI = -0.268 to 0.148)]. On the OSCE, both W and EM intervention groups outperformed controls [mean difference = 0.261; (95%CI = -0.047 to -0.476; p = 0.013)]. The intervention group used more optimistic words (p < 0.001) and more "I" and "self" pronouns in their essays (p < 0.001), whereas the control group used more "other" pronouns (p < 0.001) and more negations (p < 0.001)., Discussion: Cohen et al.'s finding that a brief self-affirmation task narrowed the ethnic academic achievement gap was replicated on the written assessment but against expectations, this was due to reduced performance in the W group. On the OSCE, the intervention improved performance in both W and EM groups. In the intervention condition, participants tended to write about themselves and used more optimistic words than in the control group, indicating the task was completed as requested. The study shows that minimal interventions can have substantial educational outcomes several months later, which has implications for the multitude of seemingly trivial changes in teaching that are made on an everyday basis, whose consequences are never formally assessed.

Background: In 2000/1, a survey found that 42% of newly qualified UK doctors felt their medical training had not prepared them well for starting work., Aim: To determine factors associated with preparedness., Methods: A questionnaire to all 5143 newly qualified doctors in May 2005., Results: The response rate was 2062/4784 = 43.1%. 15% of respondents felt poorly prepared by medical school for starting work. There were no associations between gender or graduate entry status and preparedness. The personality traits of conscientiousness (r=0.14; p < 0.001) and extraversion (r=0.15; p < 0.001) were associated with high preparedness. Neuroticism was associated with low preparedness (r= -0.16; p < 0.001).Respondents who had done shadowing attachments were more likely to feel prepared (58.6% vs 48.5% felt prepared; 2=4.0; p=0.05), as were graduates of problem based learning courses (61.3% vs 56.1%; 2=5.0; p=0.03). Preparedness correlated with agreement with the statements 'My teaching was relevant to real life as a doctor' (rho=0.36; p < 0.001), and 'As a house officer I found it easy to get help when I needed it' (rho=0.29; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Improvements in the preparedness of UK medical school graduates may be due to increased relevance of undergraduate teaching to life as a junior doctor and increased support in the workplace.

Evidence shows that medical students from Minority Ethnic (ME) backgrounds and male medical students underperform in undergraduate examinations. Our study confirmed these findings in first year clinical (year 3) medical students, and further explored this disparity in performance. We conducted a series of meta-analyses to measure the effects of sex and ethnic group on the written examination and Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores of three groups of year 3 medical students at two London UK medical schools (n = 1,051; 46.0% male; 48.7% White). Male and ME students scored lower on written and OSCE assessments. Both assessments were statistically significantly correlated (mean r = 0.45) and therefore the effects of sex and ethnic group were measured on each exam after being adjusted for the effect of the other. Although sex and ethnic differences remained on the OSCE when adjusted for written performance, these differences disappeared on the written when it was adjusted for OSCE performance. These findings may reflect a relative deficit in practical clinical knowledge in male and ME year 3 students. Results were unlikely to be due to examiner bias, as the machine-marked unadjusted written exam results showed significant sex and ethnic differences.

Objective: To explore ethnic stereotypes of UK medical students in the context of academic underachievement of medical students from ethnic minorities., Design: Qualitative study using semistructured one to one interviews and focus groups., Setting: A London medical school., Participants: 27 year 3 medical students and 25 clinical teachers, purposively sampled for ethnicity and sex., Methods: Data were analysed using the theory of stereotype threat (a psychological phenomenon thought to negatively affect the performance of people from ethnic minorities in educational contexts) and the constant comparative method., Results: Participants believed the student-teacher relationship was vital for clinical learning. Teachers had strong perceptions about "good" clinical students (interactive, keen, respectful), and some described being aggressive towards students whom they perceived as quiet, unmotivated, and unwilling. Students had equally strong perceptions about "good" clinical teachers (encouraging, interested, interactive, non-aggressive). Students and teachers had concordant and well developed perceptions of the "typical" Asian clinical medical student who was considered over-reliant on books, poor at communicating with patients, too quiet during clinical teaching sessions, and unmotivated owing to being pushed into studying medicine by ambitious parents. Stereotypes of the "typical" white student were less well developed: autonomous, confident, and outgoing team player. Direct discrimination was not reported., Conclusions: Asian clinical medical students may be more likely than white students to be perceived stereotypically and negatively, which may reduce their learning by jeopardising their relationships with teachers. The existence of a negative stereotype about their group also raises the possibility that underperformance of medical students from ethnic minorities may be partly due to stereotype threat. It is recommended that clinical teachers be given opportunities and training to encourage them to get to know their students as individuals and thus foster positive educational relationships with them.