General Medical Council

About: General Medical Council is a government organization based out in London, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Health care & Public health. The organization has 69 authors who have published 111 publications receiving 1663 citations. The organization is also known as: GMC.

Predictors of ophthalmology career success (POCS) study.

Abstract: Objective Ophthalmology is the busiest outpatient specialty with demand predicted to rise over 40% in the next 20 years. A significant increase in the number of trainee ophthalmologists is required to fill currently vacant consultant posts and meet the UK's workforce demands by 2038. Our aim was to understand what determines success in ophthalmology training, in order to inform future ophthalmologists, refine recruitment and facilitate workforce planning. Methods and Analysis This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study using routinely collected data available from UK Medical Education Database (UKMED) (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk/). Data were analysed on 1350 candidates who had applied for ophthalmology specialty training (OST) between 2012 and 2018, as well as 495 candidates who had attempted Fellow of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists (FRCOphth) Part 1 between 2013 and 2018. Participants who had not obtained their primary medical qualification from the UK medical schools were excluded. Primary outcome measures included gaining a place on the OST programme and passing the FRCOphth Part 1 examination on first attempt. Results Higher education performance measure decile scores at medical school are strongly predictive in securing an OST post and passing the part 1 examination first time (p<0.001). Candidates who attempt FRCOphth Part 1 prior to their ST1 application are more likely to get a place on OST on first attempt. Socioeconomic factors, gender and ethnicity do not influence success in OST entry. Male trainees are more likely to pass FRCOphth Part 1 on their first attempt. Conclusion This study is the first quantitative assessment of the factors that determine success in OST recruitment and ophthalmology postgraduate examinations in the UK. Similar studies should be undertaken in all other medical and surgical specialties to understand what factors predict success.

The Association of Physicians of Great Britain and Ireland: now what?

Abstract: This inelegant question was stimulated by two related events. The first was the Association's centenary, celebrated in style at the Guy's Hospital Campus of King's College London in 2006; the second, West's elegant account of ‘one hundred years of an association of physicians’.1 Both made me reflect on the continuing fascination of medicine, its distinguished past and exciting future, and the role of the Association. My purpose is not to analyse the many factors contributing to recent changes in clinical practice—society's expectations, the increasing effectiveness, complexity and cost of modern medicine—but rather to consider how the Association might help meet the needs of physicians in the years ahead. Implicit in that self-imposed remit is a sense that the Association may not have been fulfilling that function as well in recent years as formerly. The picture chosen to illustrate West's history of the Association was of Osler. I have considerable regard for William Osler, bringing as he did Scottish educational values, via Canada and the USA, not just to England but to Oxford.2 He practised at a time when medicine was …

GMC review of fitness to practise procedures is complete.

Abstract: McCartney criticises the impact of the GMC’s fitness to practise procedures on vulnerable doctors,1 but she may not know that we have concluded the review that we commissioned Prof Louis Appleby to oversee. We are very grateful for Prof Appleby’s time and commitment in this review. His expertise enabled us to produce a comprehensive set …

GMC's response to Hunn on time for evidence based change of PLAB.

Abstract: Hunn raises some interesting points.1 He asks the General Medical Council about “the sort of medical workforce the UK deserves.” The answer is straightforward: UK patients deserve doctors who provide a high standard of care, whether they trained in this country or abroad, and we are determined to play our part in driving up standards. …

The jigsaw of child protection.

Abstract: Heather Payne cites two cases involving Dr David Southall in her article ‘The jigsaw of child protection’ (JRSM 2008;101:93–94). She uses these to advance general propositions about the role and operation of the GMC. Dr David Southall has appealed the more recent decision to the High Court. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on either case in advance of that appeal. But there is a more general point about the way that the GMC’s critics allow a very small number of specific cases to dominate their arguments and skew their assertions about how paediatricians are treated by the GMC. The GMC’s statutory purpose is to protect, promote and maintain the health and safety of the public by ensuring proper standards in the practice of medicine. We investigate complaints about individual doctors in order to establish whether their fitness to practise is impaired. Paediatricians attract complaints like other doctors, but it is untrue that large or disproportionate numbers of paediatricians are represented in our fitness-to-practise procedures or that other than a very small number are referred for a public hearing. Between April 2006 and April 2008, we received 9400 enquiries or complaints about doctors of all specialities. Of those we investigated, 14 were about paediatricians allegedly in connection with child protection work. 11 of the 14 have concluded without reference to a fitness-to-practice panel or other action by the GMC. Three investigations have not yet been concluded. It is actually extremely rare for a paediatrician to appear before a panel in connection with child protection work. Since 2004, panels have considered more than 600 cases. Only two could reasonably be said to have been about paediatricians involved in child protection. We agree it cannot be in the public interest if doctors are inhibited from acting to protect children or deterred from giving evidence honestly and truthfully and within their competence. But, equally, it cannot be in the public interest, or the interests of the medical profession, if the GMC does not act when doctors practise incompetently or inappropriately.