Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24072882›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

Academic performance of ethnic minority candidates and discrimination in the MRCGP examinations between 2010 and 2012: analysis of data.

Aneez Esmail, Chris Roberts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Language of primary medical qualification and differential MRCGP exam attainment: an observational study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016-2021: a cross-sectional study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Time for preference-informed foundation allocation?Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Aneez EsmailFaculty of Medical and Human Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
Chris Roberts

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the difference in failure rates in the postgraduate examination of the Royal College of General Practitioners (MRCGP) by ethnic or national background, and to identify factors associated with pass rates in the clinical skills assessment component of the examination.

designAnalysis of data provided by the Royal College of General Practitioners and the General Medical Council.

participantsCohort of 5095 candidates sitting the applied knowledge test and clinical skills assessment components of the MRCGP examination between November 2010 and November 2012. A further analysis was carried out on 1175 candidates not trained in the United Kingdom, who sat an English language capability test (IELTS) and the Professional and Linguistic Assessment Board (PLAB) examination (as required for full medical registration), controlling for scores on these examinations and relating them to pass rates of the clinical skills assessment.

settingUnited Kingdom.

resultsAfter controlling for age, sex, and performance in the applied knowledge test, significant differences persisted between white UK graduates and other candidate groups. Black and minority ethnic graduates trained in the UK were more likely to fail the clinical skills assessment at their first attempt than their white UK colleagues (odds ratio 3.536 (95% confidence interval 2.701 to 4.629), P<0.001; failure rate 17% v 4.5%). Black and minority ethnic candidates who trained abroad were also more likely to fail the clinical skills assessment than white UK candidates (14.741 (11.397 to 19.065), P<0.001; 65% v 4.5%). For candidates not trained in the UK, black or minority ethnic candidates were more likely to fail than white candidates, but this difference was no longer significant after controlling for scores in the applied knowledge test, IELTS, and PLAB examinations (adjusted odds ratio 1.580 (95% confidence interval 0.878 to 2.845), P=0.127).

conclusionsSubjective bias due to racial discrimination in the clinical skills assessment may be a cause of failure for UK trained candidates and international medical graduates. The difference between British black and minority ethnic candidates and British white candidates in the pass rates of the clinical skills assessment, despite controlling for prior attainment, suggests that subjective bias could also be a factor. Changes to the clinical skills assessment could improve the perception of the examination as being biased against black and minority ethnic candidates. The difference in training experience and other cultural factors between candidates trained in the UK and abroad could affect outcomes. Consideration should be given to strengthening postgraduate training for international medical graduates.

Indexed as

AccreditationRacismBiasBlack PeopleClinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementEthnicityForeign Medical GraduatesGeneral PracticeHumansLanguageLogistic ModelsMinority GroupsOdds RatioSocieties, MedicalUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID24072882
PMCPMC3898419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.