scholarly journals Are there differences between those doctors who apply for a training post in Foundation Year 2 and those who take time out of the training pathway? A UK multicohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e032021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cleland ◽  
Gordon Prescott ◽  
Kim Walker ◽  
Peter Johnston ◽  
Ben Kumwenda
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Workforce Planning ◽  
Sociodemographic Factors ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Time Out ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
Training Post ◽  
Multivariable Regression ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Participation In Higher Education

IntroductionKnowledge about the career decisions of doctors in relation to specialty (residency) training is essential in terms of UK workforce planning. However, little is known about which doctors elect to progress directly from Foundation Year 2 (F2) into core/specialty/general practice training and those who instead opt for an alternative next career step.ObjectiveTo identify if there were any individual differences between these two groups of doctors.DesignThis was a longitudinal, cohort study of ‘home’ students who graduated from UK medical schools between 2010 and 2015 and completed the Foundation Programme (FP) between 2012 and 2017.We used the UK Medical Education Database (UKMED) to access linked data from different sources, including medical school performance, specialty training applications and career preferences. Multivariable regression analyses were used to predict the odds of taking time out of training based on various sociodemographic factors.Results18 380/38 905 (47.2%) of F2 doctors applied for, and accepted, a training post offer immediately after completing F2. The most common pattern for doctors taking time out of the training pathway after FP was to have a 1-year (7155: 38.8%) or a 2-year break (2605: 14.0%) from training. The odds of not proceeding directly into core or specialty training were higher for those who were male, white, entered medical school as (high) school leavers and whose parents were educated to degree level. Doctors from areas of low participation in higher education were significantly (0.001) more likely to proceed directly into core or specialty training.ConclusionThe results show that UK doctors from higher socioeconomic groups are less likely to choose to progress directly from the FP into specialty training. The data suggest that widening access and encouraging more socioeconomic diversity in our medical students may be helpful in terms of attracting F2s into core/specialty training posts.

scholarly journals Modernising Medical Careers: a urological workforce perspective

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
GO Hellawell ◽  
SS Kommu ◽  
F Mumtaz
Keyword(s):  
Junior Doctors ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Medical Careers ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
The Future ◽  
Training Programmes ◽  
The Uk ◽  
And Training

The training of junior doctors in the UK is undergoing an evolution to ensure that those concerned are adequately trained and specialised for current and future consultant practice. The implementation of this training evolution is currently widespread at the foundation level (SHO-equivalent) and will expand to specialty training programmes as foundation programme trainees complete their training in 2007. Urology has led the change to the specialty training, with three-year trainees having entered the specialty in 2005. The emergence of urology as the lead specialty for change originated in part from a meeting in 1998 that addressed the future of urology and training, the summary of which was published later that year.

scholarly journals BJS.02Graduates from different medical schools vary in their performance on the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) Examinations

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricky Ellis ◽  
Duncan Scrimgeour ◽  
Jennifer Cleland ◽  
Amanda Lee ◽  
Peter Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Royal College ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Medical Schools ◽  
Sociodemographic Factors ◽  
Pass Rates ◽  
Medical Graduates ◽  
Surgical Trainees ◽  
Socio Demographic Factors ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Aims UK medical schools vary in their mission, curricula and pedagogy, but little is known of the effect of this on postgraduate examination performance. We explored differences in outcomes at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons examination (MRCS) between medical schools, course types, national ranking and candidate sociodemographic factors. Methods A retrospective longitudinal study of all UK medical graduates who attempted MRCS Part A (n = 9730) and MRCS Part B (n = 4645) between 2007 and 2017, utilising the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk). We examined the relationship between medical school and success at first attempt of the MRCS using univariate analysis. Logistic regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors of MRCS success. Results MRCS pass rates differed significantly between medical schools (P < 0.001). Russell Group graduates were more likely to pass MRCS Part A (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.79 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.56-2.05]) and Part B (OR 1.24 [1.03-1.49])).  Trainees from Standard-Entry 5-year programmes were more likely to pass MRCS at first attempt compared to those from extended (Gateway) courses, Part A OR 3.72 [2.69-5.15]; Part B (OR 1.67 [1.02-2.76]. Non-graduates entering medical school were more likely to pass Part A (OR 1.40 [1.19-1.64]) and Part B (OR 1.66 [1.24-2.24]) than graduate-entrants. Conclusion Medical school, course type and socio-demographic factors are associated with success on the MRCS. This information will help to identify surgical trainees at risk of failing the MRCS in order for schools of surgery to redistribute resources to those in need.

What is the SJT?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Metcalfe ◽  
Harveer Dev
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Time Pressure ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Medical Schools ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
Final Score ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Selection Of

SJTs are commonly used by organizations for personnel selection. They aim to provide realistic, but hypothetical, scenarios and possible answers which are either selected or ranked by the candidate. One such test will contribute half, or significantly more than half, the score used by applicants to the UK Foundation Programme. The test will involve a single paper over two hours and twenty minutes in which candidates will answer 70 questions. This equates to approximately two minutes per question. Your response to 60 questions will be included in your final score, while ten questions embedded throughout the test will be pilot questions which are designed to be validated but not counted in your final score. You will not be able to differentiate pilot from genuine test questions and should answer every question as if it ‘counts’. In one SJT pilot, 96% of candidates finished the test within two hours, which provides some indication about the time pressure. It is important to answer all questions and not simply ‘guess’ those left at the end. Although the SJT is not negatively marked, random guesses are not allocated points. The scoring software will identify guesses by looking for unusual or sporadic answer patterns. The SJT will be held locally by individual medical schools under invigilated conditions. Therefore, your medical school should be in touch about specific local arrangements. Each SJT paper will include a selection of questions, each mapped to a specific professional attribute. Questions should be evenly distributed between attributes and between scenario type, i.e. ‘patient’, ‘colleague’, or ‘personal’. The SJT will include two types of question: ● multiple choice questions (approximately one- third) ● ranking questions (approximately two- thirds). These begin with a scenario and provide eight possible answers. Three of these are correct and should be selected. The remaining five are incorrect. The example in Box 2.1 provides an illustrative medical school scenario. For questions based around Foundation Programme scenarios, over 100 examples are provided for practice from onwards.

Applying to the UK foundation programme from a European medical school

BMJ ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. i6592
Author(s):  
Robert Powell ◽  
Hannatu Lawan
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals Time Out of General Surgery Specialty Training in the UK: A National Database Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Elsey ◽  
Joe West ◽  
Gareth Griffiths ◽  
David J Humes
Keyword(s):  
General Surgery ◽  
National Database ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Database Study ◽  
Time Out ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals Recruitment from foundation year 2 posts into specialty training: a potential success story?

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 306-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann M. Boyle ◽  
Deborah A. Chaloner ◽  
Timothy Millward ◽  
Vidhya Rao ◽  
Charlotte Messer
Keyword(s):  
First Year ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Success Story ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
Potential Success ◽  
The Uk

SummaryThis paper examines the characteristics of a foundation year 2 post in psychiatry from the Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland foundation programme, where all three of the trainees who occupied the post in its first year were successfully appointed to specialty training posts in psychiatry. We discuss the potential strengths of foundation posts in psychiatry as a possible recruitment aid into specialty training in psychiatry in the UK.

scholarly journals Exposure of undergraduates to authentic GP teaching and subsequent entry to GP training: a quantitative study of UK medical schools

2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (657) ◽  
pp. e248-e252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Alberti ◽  
Hannah L Randles ◽  
Alex Harding ◽  
Robert K McKinley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Medical School ◽  
Quantitative Study ◽  
Medical Schools ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
Foundation Programme ◽  
Practice Teaching ◽  
The Uk ◽  
General Practice Training ◽  
Gp Training

BackgroundIt has been suggested that the quantity of exposure to general practice teaching at medical school is associated with future choice of a career as a GP.Aim To examine the relationship between general practice exposure at medical school and the percentage of each school’s graduates appointed to a general practice training programme after foundation training (postgraduate years 1 and 2).Design and setting A quantitative study of 29 UK medical schools.MethodThe UK Foundation Programme Office (UKFPO) destination surveys of 2014 and 2015 were used to determine the percentage of graduates of each UK medical school who were appointed to a GP training programme after foundation year 2. The Spearman rank correlation was used to examine the correlation between these data and the number of sessions spent in placements in general practice at each medical school.ResultsA statistically significant association was demonstrated between the quantity of authentic general practice teaching at each medical school and the percentage of its graduates who entered GP training after foundation programme year 2 in both 2014 (correlation coefficient [r] 0.41, P = 0.027) and 2015 (r 0.3, P = 0.044). Authentic general practice teaching here is described as teaching in a practice with patient contact, in contrast to non-clinical sessions such as group tutorials in the medical school.DiscussionThe authors have demonstrated, for the first time in the UK, an association between the quantity of clinical GP teaching at medical school and entry to general practice training. This study suggests that an increased use of, and investment in, undergraduate general practice placements would help to ensure that the UK meets its target of 50% of medical graduates entering general practice.

Completion of paediatric training: trends across 2011–2017 cohorts

2020 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-320163
Author(s):  
Melody Grace Redman ◽  
Davide Carzedda ◽  
Nicola Jay ◽  
Simon J Clark ◽  
Marie Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Workforce Planning ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Retrospective Survey ◽  
Training Time ◽  
Grace Period ◽  
The Uk

ObjectiveTo determine trends in the demographics and destinations of doctors who have recently completed paediatric training in the UK.DesignA survey was sent to all new paediatric certificate holders 1 year on from completing specialty training every year from 2011 to 2017.SettingRetrospective survey.Outcome measuresDemographics, career destinations, time to complete training, working patterns, subspecialty registration, numbers of job applications, and use of the period of grace are reported.Results1262 people who gained their paediatric certificate in the UK between 2011 and 2017 completed the survey (60.6% response rate). 58.5% (n=738) of respondents were female, and 32.4% (n=224) of women work less than full time, compared with 4.6% (n=23) of men. 85.9% (n=1056) of respondents were in a UK consultant post. 7.6% (n=94) were working overseas. 65.1% (n=722) remained in the region they trained in. 64.8% (n=1348) were registered for general paediatrics, whereas 35.2% (n=733) had subspecialised.Respondents who held a non-UK medical degree (47.5%, n=501) made more job applications on average (mean=2.2; 95% CI 2.0 to 2.5) than those with a UK degree (52.5%, n=554) (mean=1.1; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.2) (p<0.001). Average training time increased from 9.8 years (95% CI 9.4 to 10.2) to 11.3 years (95% CI 11.1 to 11.6) (p<0.001). Respondents’ use of their grace period reduced from 42.7% (n=47) to 20.6% (n=29) (p<0.001).ConclusionsThe data reflect the diverse paediatric workforce and doctors’ working patterns following the completion of paediatric training in the UK. The trends demonstrated are vital to consider for evidence-based workforce planning.

scholarly journals Does performance at medical school predict success at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination? A retrospective cohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e046615
Author(s):  
Ricky Ellis ◽  
Duncan S G Scrimgeour ◽  
Peter A Brennan ◽  
Amanda J Lee ◽  
Jennifer Cleland
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Medical School ◽  
School Performance ◽  
Royal College ◽  
Sociodemographic Factors ◽  
Significant Independent Predictor ◽  
Situational Judgement Test ◽  
Medical School Performance ◽  
Significant Measure ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundIdentifying predictors of success in postgraduate examinations can help guide the career choices of medical students and may aid early identification of trainees requiring extra support to progress in specialty training. We assessed whether performance on the educational performance measurement (EPM) and situational judgement test (SJT) used for selection into foundation training predicted success at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.MethodsThis was a longitudinal, cohort study using data from the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk). UK medical graduates who had attempted Part A (n=2585) and Part B (n=755) of the MRCS between 2014 and 2017 were included. χ2 and independent t-tests were used to examine the relationship between medical school performance and sociodemographic factors with first-attempt success at MRCS Part A and B. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify independent predictors of MRCS performance.ResultsThe odds of passing MRCS increased by 55% for Part A (OR 1.55 (95% CI 1.48 to 1.61)) and 23% for Part B (1.23 (1.14 to 1.32)) for every additional EPM decile point gained. For every point awarded for additional degrees in the EPM, candidates were 20% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.20 (1.13 to 1.29)) and 17% more likely to pass Part B (1.17 (1.04 to 1.33)). For every point awarded for publications in the EPM, candidates were 14% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.14 (1.01 to 1.28)). SJT score was not a statistically significant independent predictor of MRCS success.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated the EPM’s independent predictive power and found that medical school performance deciles are the most significant measure of predicting later success in the MRCS. These findings can be used by medical schools, training boards and workforce planners to inform evidence-based and contemporary selection and assessment strategies.

Inspiring the next generation of surgeons

2019 ◽  
Vol 96 (1133) ◽  
pp. 162-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shujhat Khan
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Medical School ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Surgical Training ◽  
Medical Curriculum ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Specialty Training ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
Career Pathway ◽  
The Uk

The shortage of applicants looking to enter surgical specialties is well documented. Indeed, there are a number of reasons for this ranging from potential flaws within the training pathway to a lack of both financial and social support in what is undoubtedly a stressful career pathway. However, it is important that we discuss these shortcomings and exploit such opportunities to make surgery a more attractive prospect. These changes include adapting student’s experience while still at medical school through changes to the medical curriculum and surgical rotations. In addition, it is important to assess what factors applicants prioritise when applying for specialty training, and addressing the gender divide within surgery so as to remove barriers for progression in surgical training. Similarly, by encouraging research within surgery, it improves treatment options for patients as well as motivating those more academically inclined to pursue this specialty. This can produce more proficient surgeons and improve the competitiveness of training posts within remote regions in the UK. Ultimately, these changes will likely translate to more satisfied trainees and improved patient care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document