Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study
Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments. To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors. Observational study o...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of general practice 2023-04, Vol.73 (729), p.e284-e293 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e293 |
---|---|
container_issue | 729 |
container_start_page | e284 |
container_title | British journal of general practice |
container_volume | 73 |
creator | Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan Botan, Vanessa Williams, Nicki Emerson, Kim Kameen, Fiona Pope, Lindsey Freeman, Adrian Law, Graham |
description | Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments.
To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors.
Observational study of doctors in GP specialty training in the UK.
Data were analysed from doctors' selection in 2016 to the end of GP training, linking selection, licensing, and demographic data to develop multivariable logistic regression models. Predictors of pass rates were identified for each assessment.
A total of 3429 doctors entering GP specialty training in 2016 were included, with doctors of different sex (female 63.81% versus male 36.19%), ethnic group (White British 53.95%, minority ethnic 43.04%, and mixed 3.01%), country of primary medical qualification (UK 76.76% versus non-UK 23.24%), and declared disability (disability declared 11.98% versus not declared 88.02%). Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) scores were highly predictive for GP training end-point assessments, including the Applied Knowledge Test (AKT), Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA), and Workplace-Based Assessment (WPBA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP). Ethnic minority doctors did significantly better compared with White British doctors in the AKT (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 4.10,
= 0.042). There were no significant differences on other assessments: CSA (OR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.20,
= 0.201), RCA (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.32,
= 0.156), or WPBA-ARCP (OR 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.01,
= 0.057).
Ethnic background did not reduce the chance of passing GP licensing tests once sex, place of primary medical qualification, declared disability, and MSRA scores were accounted for. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0474 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10049616</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2793089495</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-7cec6d7b80fabe3f85c2ae0dcda057f6a09d404a14822be411bdf7703e7de83b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU2LFDEURYMoTju6dSkBN26qzVdVEjeijbbKiI0oLkMqeWVnqKrMJKmB_vem7XFQV2_xTi735SD0lJI151q_fPtpu1szwtiaCCnuoRUVUjUtE-w-WhHdkYZ2gp-hRzlfkop1lDxEZ7zTWjJCV2jeQRpimuzsAMcBQ9nPweEpzDGFcsA3kPKS8Y99KIB9dCWmjMOMyx7w56-b7Q7bnCHnCeaCa2LX1DL0FbbYpZhzk8GVEGc74lwWf3iMHgx2zPDkdp6j7-_ffdt8aC6-bD9u3lw0TlBdGunAdV72igy2Bz6o1jELxDtvSSuHzhLtBRGWCsVYD4LS3g9SEg7Sg-I9P0evT7lXSz-Bd7VdsqO5SmGy6WCiDebfzRz25me8MZQQoTva1YQXtwkpXi-Qi5lCdjCOdoa4ZMOk5lop1fKKPv8PvYxLqjefKKK00G2l1ifq98ckGO7aUGKOLs3RpTm6NEeX9cGzv2-4w__I478Alz-auQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2793089495</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan ; Botan, Vanessa ; Williams, Nicki ; Emerson, Kim ; Kameen, Fiona ; Pope, Lindsey ; Freeman, Adrian ; Law, Graham</creator><creatorcontrib>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan ; Botan, Vanessa ; Williams, Nicki ; Emerson, Kim ; Kameen, Fiona ; Pope, Lindsey ; Freeman, Adrian ; Law, Graham</creatorcontrib><description>Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments.
To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors.
Observational study of doctors in GP specialty training in the UK.
Data were analysed from doctors' selection in 2016 to the end of GP training, linking selection, licensing, and demographic data to develop multivariable logistic regression models. Predictors of pass rates were identified for each assessment.
A total of 3429 doctors entering GP specialty training in 2016 were included, with doctors of different sex (female 63.81% versus male 36.19%), ethnic group (White British 53.95%, minority ethnic 43.04%, and mixed 3.01%), country of primary medical qualification (UK 76.76% versus non-UK 23.24%), and declared disability (disability declared 11.98% versus not declared 88.02%). Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) scores were highly predictive for GP training end-point assessments, including the Applied Knowledge Test (AKT), Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA), and Workplace-Based Assessment (WPBA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP). Ethnic minority doctors did significantly better compared with White British doctors in the AKT (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 4.10,
= 0.042). There were no significant differences on other assessments: CSA (OR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.20,
= 0.201), RCA (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.32,
= 0.156), or WPBA-ARCP (OR 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.01,
= 0.057).
Ethnic background did not reduce the chance of passing GP licensing tests once sex, place of primary medical qualification, declared disability, and MSRA scores were accounted for.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-1643</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1478-5242</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0474</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36997201</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Royal College of General Practitioners</publisher><subject>Clinical Competence ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Educational Measurement ; Ethnic and Racial Minorities ; Ethnicity ; Family physicians ; Female ; General Practice - education ; Humans ; Male ; Minority & ethnic groups ; Minority Groups - education ; Physicians ; Primary care ; Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt ; United Kingdom ; White People</subject><ispartof>British journal of general practice, 2023-04, Vol.73 (729), p.e284-e293</ispartof><rights>The Authors.</rights><rights>Copyright Royal College of General Practitioners Apr 2023</rights><rights>The Authors 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-7cec6d7b80fabe3f85c2ae0dcda057f6a09d404a14822be411bdf7703e7de83b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-7cec6d7b80fabe3f85c2ae0dcda057f6a09d404a14822be411bdf7703e7de83b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0899-9616 ; 0000-0003-2484-8201 ; 0000-0003-1583-3913 ; 0000-0001-7904-0264 ; 0000-0002-8232-3043</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049616/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049616/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36997201$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Botan, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Nicki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emerson, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kameen, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pope, Lindsey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Law, Graham</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study</title><title>British journal of general practice</title><addtitle>Br J Gen Pract</addtitle><description>Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments.
To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors.
Observational study of doctors in GP specialty training in the UK.
Data were analysed from doctors' selection in 2016 to the end of GP training, linking selection, licensing, and demographic data to develop multivariable logistic regression models. Predictors of pass rates were identified for each assessment.
A total of 3429 doctors entering GP specialty training in 2016 were included, with doctors of different sex (female 63.81% versus male 36.19%), ethnic group (White British 53.95%, minority ethnic 43.04%, and mixed 3.01%), country of primary medical qualification (UK 76.76% versus non-UK 23.24%), and declared disability (disability declared 11.98% versus not declared 88.02%). Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) scores were highly predictive for GP training end-point assessments, including the Applied Knowledge Test (AKT), Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA), and Workplace-Based Assessment (WPBA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP). Ethnic minority doctors did significantly better compared with White British doctors in the AKT (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 4.10,
= 0.042). There were no significant differences on other assessments: CSA (OR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.20,
= 0.201), RCA (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.32,
= 0.156), or WPBA-ARCP (OR 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.01,
= 0.057).
Ethnic background did not reduce the chance of passing GP licensing tests once sex, place of primary medical qualification, declared disability, and MSRA scores were accounted for.</description><subject>Clinical Competence</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Educational Measurement</subject><subject>Ethnic and Racial Minorities</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Family physicians</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General Practice - education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Minority & ethnic groups</subject><subject>Minority Groups - education</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><subject>White People</subject><issn>0960-1643</issn><issn>1478-5242</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkU2LFDEURYMoTju6dSkBN26qzVdVEjeijbbKiI0oLkMqeWVnqKrMJKmB_vem7XFQV2_xTi735SD0lJI151q_fPtpu1szwtiaCCnuoRUVUjUtE-w-WhHdkYZ2gp-hRzlfkop1lDxEZ7zTWjJCV2jeQRpimuzsAMcBQ9nPweEpzDGFcsA3kPKS8Y99KIB9dCWmjMOMyx7w56-b7Q7bnCHnCeaCa2LX1DL0FbbYpZhzk8GVEGc74lwWf3iMHgx2zPDkdp6j7-_ffdt8aC6-bD9u3lw0TlBdGunAdV72igy2Bz6o1jELxDtvSSuHzhLtBRGWCsVYD4LS3g9SEg7Sg-I9P0evT7lXSz-Bd7VdsqO5SmGy6WCiDebfzRz25me8MZQQoTva1YQXtwkpXi-Qi5lCdjCOdoa4ZMOk5lop1fKKPv8PvYxLqjefKKK00G2l1ifq98ckGO7aUGKOLs3RpTm6NEeX9cGzv2-4w__I478Alz-auQ</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan</creator><creator>Botan, Vanessa</creator><creator>Williams, Nicki</creator><creator>Emerson, Kim</creator><creator>Kameen, Fiona</creator><creator>Pope, Lindsey</creator><creator>Freeman, Adrian</creator><creator>Law, Graham</creator><general>Royal College of General Practitioners</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0899-9616</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2484-8201</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1583-3913</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7904-0264</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8232-3043</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study</title><author>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan ; Botan, Vanessa ; Williams, Nicki ; Emerson, Kim ; Kameen, Fiona ; Pope, Lindsey ; Freeman, Adrian ; Law, Graham</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-7cec6d7b80fabe3f85c2ae0dcda057f6a09d404a14822be411bdf7703e7de83b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Clinical Competence</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Educational Measurement</topic><topic>Ethnic and Racial Minorities</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Family physicians</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General Practice - education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Minority & ethnic groups</topic><topic>Minority Groups - education</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><topic>White People</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Botan, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Nicki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emerson, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kameen, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pope, Lindsey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Law, Graham</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>British journal of general practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan</au><au>Botan, Vanessa</au><au>Williams, Nicki</au><au>Emerson, Kim</au><au>Kameen, Fiona</au><au>Pope, Lindsey</au><au>Freeman, Adrian</au><au>Law, Graham</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study</atitle><jtitle>British journal of general practice</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Gen Pract</addtitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>73</volume><issue>729</issue><spage>e284</spage><epage>e293</epage><pages>e284-e293</pages><issn>0960-1643</issn><eissn>1478-5242</eissn><abstract>Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments.
To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors.
Observational study of doctors in GP specialty training in the UK.
Data were analysed from doctors' selection in 2016 to the end of GP training, linking selection, licensing, and demographic data to develop multivariable logistic regression models. Predictors of pass rates were identified for each assessment.
A total of 3429 doctors entering GP specialty training in 2016 were included, with doctors of different sex (female 63.81% versus male 36.19%), ethnic group (White British 53.95%, minority ethnic 43.04%, and mixed 3.01%), country of primary medical qualification (UK 76.76% versus non-UK 23.24%), and declared disability (disability declared 11.98% versus not declared 88.02%). Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) scores were highly predictive for GP training end-point assessments, including the Applied Knowledge Test (AKT), Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA), and Workplace-Based Assessment (WPBA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP). Ethnic minority doctors did significantly better compared with White British doctors in the AKT (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 4.10,
= 0.042). There were no significant differences on other assessments: CSA (OR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.20,
= 0.201), RCA (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.32,
= 0.156), or WPBA-ARCP (OR 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.01,
= 0.057).
Ethnic background did not reduce the chance of passing GP licensing tests once sex, place of primary medical qualification, declared disability, and MSRA scores were accounted for.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Royal College of General Practitioners</pub><pmid>36997201</pmid><doi>10.3399/BJGP.2022.0474</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0899-9616</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2484-8201</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1583-3913</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7904-0264</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8232-3043</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0960-1643 |
ispartof | British journal of general practice, 2023-04, Vol.73 (729), p.e284-e293 |
issn | 0960-1643 1478-5242 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10049616 |
source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Clinical Competence Cross-Sectional Studies Educational Measurement Ethnic and Racial Minorities Ethnicity Family physicians Female General Practice - education Humans Male Minority & ethnic groups Minority Groups - education Physicians Primary care Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt United Kingdom White People |
title | Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T11%3A55%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20ethnic%20minority%20versus%20White%20doctors%20in%20the%20MRCGP%20assessment%202016-2021:%20a%20cross-sectional%20study&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20general%20practice&rft.au=Siriwardena,%20Aloysius%20Niroshan&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=729&rft.spage=e284&rft.epage=e293&rft.pages=e284-e293&rft.issn=0960-1643&rft.eissn=1478-5242&rft_id=info:doi/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0474&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2793089495%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2793089495&rft_id=info:pmid/36997201&rfr_iscdi=true |