TY - JOUR T1 - The expert medical generalist JF - British Journal of General Practice JO - Br J Gen Pract SP - 495 LP - 496 DO - 10.3399/bjgp18X699329 VL - 68 IS - 675 AU - Tommy Hunter Y1 - 2018/10/01 UR - http://bjgp.org/content/68/675/495.abstract N2 - The proposed new Scottish GP contract1 has suggested that GPs be considered ‘expert medical generalists’ (EMGs). Helen Stokes-Lampard, Chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP), has named GPs ‘consultants in general practice’.2 These new titles beg the question of whether they are granted simply for the completion of vocational training involving 18 months in the field in which we are experts, after a total of 3 years’ training post-foundation, or whether there is more involved in developing this expertise.Much importance has been placed on the regard with which general practice is held within universities and hospitals, and its effect on GP recruitment, and so it is likely that unfavourable comparisons will be drawn between the experience and training required to become a consultant in general practice and a consultant in anything else. Although not based on any evidence, Malcolm Gladwell’s 10 000-hour expert theory,3 representing as it does about 5 years of full-time general practice, would, nonetheless, accord with the time at which many of us begin to feel that we have obtained some mastery of our subject. Gladwell’s theory, however, does not simply mean working at the job for 10 000 hours but practising, that is, actively pursuing improvement in order to become expert. This aspect bears some closer consideration.Reeve et al4 describe three different views of the GP role and suggest that there are … ER -