Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

Selecting GP speciality trainees: squaring the circle?

Terry Kemple
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (582): 61-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11X549036
Terry Kemple
Horfield Health Centre, Lockleaze Road, Horfield, Bristol BS7 9RR. E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tk@elpmek.demon.co.uk
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Irish and Patterson's discussion paper reviewed the current pathway for selecting GP speciality trainees. They ask how it can be improved.1

Despite Mencken's caution that ‘for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong’,2 maybe there is an easier way.

The current structure (The National Recruitment Office for GP Training), the process (a single standardised recruitment system), and the specific outcome (successful completion of GP speciality training), coupled with continuing attempts to improve the process could make the journey to becoming a GP less of a maze and more a motorway to success.

The ideal selection outcome is that the recruited GP subsequently provides high quality care throughout a 30-year career. An optimal outcome may be that the GP provides high quality care for 5 years and then passes revalidation. The minimum outcome is that the GP passes the MRCGP licensure examination by the end of 3 years of training. However, low pass rates in the Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) module of the MRCGP examination suggest that either the selection process is flawed, or that the CSA is not a reliable, fair, and valid test. The flaw in selection may be that it is impossible to reconcile the need for the recruitment process to fill all the training posts every year, and ensure that all these recruits pass the MRCGP examination within their 3 years of training. Any worries that the MRCGP examination is not a good test of competence needs to be addressed by the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP).

Although the RCGP has always wanted a longer training scheme, the recruitment process needs to select candidates who are likely to pass the MRCGP exam within their 3 years of training. The Mencken-defying improvement may be to link their selection to the results of taking real or mock modules of the MRCGP examination. These modules could be taken online at a convenient Applied Knowledge Test examination centre, remotely by reviewing the candidates' existing ePortfolios including work-place based assessments, and by a CSA at nearby GP-training practices. The candidates could pay a fee to take these assessment modules. Only those candidates with qualifying scores would be eligible to apply for GP training.

The results of these tests could inform the training of recruits to improve their chances of success in the MRCGP exam. Weaker candidates may need a few attempts over a couple of years to qualify for GP training. Perhaps the best of these weaker candidates could be offered any unfilled training posts on an ad hoc basis, but they would not be in the 3-year GP training scheme.

Educators and learners may be reluctant to concentrate their efforts on passing a test, but the RCGP – GP curriculum statements already point in this direction. The RCGP regularly updates a curriculum that describes what a GP needs to be able to do to work in general practice for the first 5 years and conducts a membership examination that should be a reliable, fair, and valid test of that ability. After the first 5 years, the RCGP's (and General Medical Council's) regular revalidation should ensure that GPs have the competencies to practice for the rest of their careers.

Mencken also advised ‘a judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers’.2 This may describe the continuing difference between our confidence and competence in our assessment of the ability of others.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, 2011

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Irish B,
    2. Patterson F
    (2010) Selecting general practice speciality trainees: where next? Br J Gen Pract 60(580):849–852.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Mencken HL
    Quotes. Quotes Museum. http://www.quotes-museum.com/quote/59695 (accessed 1 Dec 2010).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 61 (582)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 61, Issue 582
January 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Selecting GP speciality trainees: squaring the circle?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Selecting GP speciality trainees: squaring the circle?
Terry Kemple
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (582): 61-62. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X549036

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Selecting GP speciality trainees: squaring the circle?
Terry Kemple
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (582): 61-62. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X549036
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Verschlimmbesserung
  • GPs’ understanding of the wider workforce in primary care
  • 2020 vision? A retrospective study of time-bound curative claims in British and Irish newspapers
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242