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.

Commentary: the role of appraisal and multisource feedback in the UK General Medical Council's new revalidation system.

Abstract: Beginning in December 2012, all UK doctors will be required to complete a periodic revalidation process conducted by the General Medical Council (GMC) to retain their licence to practise medicine. Regular appraisals, based on the GMC's core guidance for doctors, will be used by responsible officers to evaluate a doctor's practice based on six types of supporting information. Feedback from patients and colleagues, referred to as multisource feedback (MSF), is one element of supporting information that doctors will present at appraisal to support their revalidation.This commentary by the Chair of the GMC expands on the research in this issue by Wright and colleagues to provide an overview of the history of revalidation in the United Kingdom, discuss the role of appraisal in revalidation, and examine the need for and value of MSF in this process. The author highlights the support that the GMC has received from UK patient organizations and ends by focusing on the benefits of revalidation and the expectations for its development in the future.

UK nationals who received their medical degrees abroad: selection into, and subsequent performance in postgraduate training: a national data linkage study.

Abstract: Objectives To compare the likelihood of success at selection into specialty training for doctors who were UK nationals but obtained their primary medical qualification (PMQ) from outside the UK (‘UK overseas graduates’) with other graduate groups based on their nationality and where they gained their PMQ. We also compared subsequent educational performance during postgraduate training between the graduate groups. Design Observational study linking UK medical specialty recruitment data with postgraduate educational performance (Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) ratings). Setting Doctors recruited into national programmes of postgraduate specialist training in the UK from 2012 to 2016. Participants 34 755 UK-based trainee doctors recruited into national specialty training programmes with at least one subsequent ARCP outcome reported during the study period, including 1108 UK overseas graduates. Main outcome measures Odds of being deemed appointable at specialty selection and subsequent odds of obtaining a less versus more satisfactory category of ARCP outcome. Results UK overseas graduates were more likely to be deemed appointable compared with non-EU medical graduates who were not UK citizens (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.42), although less so than UK (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.27) or European graduates (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.75). However, UK overseas graduates were subsequently more likely to receive a less satisfactory outcome at ARCP than other graduate groups. Adjusting for age, sex, experience and the economic disparity between country of nationality and place of qualification reduced intergroup differences. Conclusions The failure of recruitment patterns to mirror the ARCP data raises issues regarding consistency in selection and the deaneries’ subsequent annual reviews. Excessive weight is possibly given to interview performance at specialty recruitment. Regulators and selectors should continue to develop robust processes for selection and assessment of doctors in training. Further support could be considered for UK overseas graduates returning to practice in the UK.

The GMC's stance on Avastin.

Abstract: It is wrong to suggest that the General Medical Council’s position is unclear or that it is the council that is putting doctors in a difficult position.1 It is also wrong to imply that the council’s guidance has recently been altered. Our prescribing guidance, …

Workplace based assessments are no more

Abstract: David Kessel, John Jenkins, and Ed Neville describe the new supervised learning events that replace workplace based assessments for foundation doctors